W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > May 2009

Re: Issue 6413 - just thinking

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 16:01:26 -0400 (EDT)
To: Gilbert Pilz <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com>
cc: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, Geoff Bullen <Geoff.Bullen@microsoft.com>, Katy Warr <katy_warr@uk.ibm.com>, "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0905061601030.5004@wnl.j3.bet>
On Wed, 6 May 2009, Gilbert Pilz wrote:

> I've run across this same complaint many times when dealing with
> customers, analysts, and other non-standards people. The common suspicion
> seems to be that we split the WS-* material up into lots of
> semi-duplicate specs with weird inter-relationships so we'd be the only
> ones who could ever understand it and thus assure ourselves of a job.

There is no need to split specs to have that effect :)

> Doug Davis wrote:
>
>       Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> wrote on 05/06/2009 10:26:49 AM:
>
>       > On Wed, 6 May 2009, Katy Warr wrote:
>       >
>       > > Yves
>       > >
>       > > I guess that by 'more general' you mean that a separate
>       fragment spec
>       > > would be re-usable outside the context of WS-Transfer?  
>       In theory, I
>       > > could imagine this might be a possibility but, in
>       practice, I can't think
>       > > of a real example.  I'm concerned that we'd create an
>       extra specification
>       >
>       > Ok, so following the same logic, SOAP and WSDL should be in
>       the same spec
>       > and namespace, almost nobody using WSDL is not using SOAP,
>       so it would be
>       > a good match.
>       > I think I am not sold to that idea ;)
>
>       Be careful - to some all of the splitting we've done has
>       really WS*/SOAP.
>       Personally I dislike that SOAP has so many 'parts'.  I didn't
>       see the point
>       of WSA (which is so small) being split into 3.  I just got
>       thru listening
>       to an analyst complain about how we messed up WS* because its
>       so complicated
>       and this proliferation of specs did not help.  
>       -Doug
> 
> 
>

-- 
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.

         ~~Yves
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 20:01:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:17:59 GMT