W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2002

Thoughts on AG001 (was RE: Strawman list of goals for WSAWG)

From: Dave Hollander <dmh@contivo.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 15:34:12 -0800
Message-ID: <BD52C6379806D51188DD00508BEEC96C9AC98A@EMAIL>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
First, I would really like to thank Daniel for putting together
such a complete and useful starter set of goals. 

Second, I suggest the we need to scope the level of our activity before
we can get the wording correct on AG001. 

1) Are we responsible for ensuring interoperability? If so, how do we
	enforce it? Does W3C or this WG want to create an escalation 
	process with which to address identified violators?

	I worked with Philips and Sony on the original CD specifications
	and implementations. We owned the license to that technology and
	would have private conversations with licensees that did not conform
	to the spec. There was always the ultimate threat of revoking the
	license.  Good system, but beyond what I think we are dealing
	with here.

2) Do we want to create the complete architectural framework that if
	conformed to will assure interoperability?  If so, do we want to 
	arbitrate disputes?

	This is my perfered position. This is a middle ground that I 
	believe is within our ability to deliver yet still delivers value
	to the community.

3) Do we want to publish an architectural framework that will be used
	in conjunction with other standards and frameworks?

	I think this is too weak and ineffectual. I also believe this would
	run counter to the W3C Quality goals (although I am not expert on
	these.) 


If we choose (2), then I would propose the following wording:

[AG001-a] provides a complete reference framework that encourages the
	development of interoperable software products from multiple vendors
	and provides a defensible basis for conformance and interoperability

	test suites.


Regards,
Dave Hollander
Contivo, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2002 18:35:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:54 GMT