- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:41:49 -0500
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Hi Mike, On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 10:54:21AM -0700, Champion, Mike wrote: > I guess I'm OK with the wording as long as "should be expressible" means > SHOULD in the typical IETF/W3C sense (whatever the RFC is). That is, this > is a worthwhile objective, but it cannot be allowed to take precedence over > getting out a reference architecture that is available soon enough, and is > understandable enough, to make a real impact on the world. Well, as Dave said, all goals are "to the greatest extent possible". RFC 2119 isn't appropriate in goals, since they exist to identify the target, not to constrain. > I'd be happier with CSF wording that measures success in terms of > coordination with the RDF/DAML folks. We want to help ensure that the SW > and the WS activities converge someday, not insist that they converge before > their time is ripe. I agree that coordination is important, and could add that as another CSF. But I've put a lot of thought into how the Semantic Web fits with Web architecture and Web services, and my proposed CSF (and the revision in my other email) reflects that. RDF is very general, and is designed as a framework for describing *anything*. I don't think Web services fall outside that scope. 8-) MB -- Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Monday, 1 April 2002 14:36:17 UTC