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

Re: Re: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]

From: JEFF.MISCHKINSKY <JEFF.MISCHKINSKY@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 07:16:22 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
Message-ID: <2903355.1014650182914.JavaMail.nobody@web11.us.oracle.com>
To: distobj@acm.org, steve.vinoski@iona.com
Cc: mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com, www-ws-arch@w3.org
> 
>> Whoa, hold on a second, this discussion is giving me "what is an 
>> object" flashbacks...OK, I think I'm better now. :-)

So what is an object? :-)

Seriously, along those lines we may want to consider "classifying" web service URIs (obviously not all URI's will identify "web services") along various axes.

One that comes to mind whether any statements regarding the "state of the service" can be made -- analgous for example to CORBA having transient and persistent references.

fire away :-)

   jeff

>> 
>> I think Web Services have three key elements:
>> 
>> 1) Identified by URI
>> 2) Accessible via standard web protocols
>> 3) Capable of interacting with applications and programs that are 
>> not directly human-driven user interfaces, e.g. web browsers
> 
> I like this definition very much.  I'd like to rewrite it slightly,
> changing two things; opening it up protocols other than "web"
> protocols, ensuring that the prose suggests that individual web
> services be URI-identifiable, and making sure that its recognized 
> that it has to be all of these things, not just one or two;
> 
>  A Web service is a service that is;
> 
>  1) identified by a URI, and
>  2) accessible via standard internet protocols, and
>  3) Capable of interacting with applications and programs that are 
>  not directly human-driven user interfaces, e.g. web browsers
> 
> I don't consider changing #2 to refer to "internet protocols" versus
> "web protocols" to be a serious change, because #1 tempers the scope
>  of the protocol to those that operate on things with URIs.  For 
> example, FTP is a valid protocol to be used for a web service 
> (despite not being commonly recognized as a "web protocol") because 
> it operates on files which are things that have URIs.
> 
>> Broad? Yes. But I think it's necessary to be broad. I don't believe
>>  you can define the basis of web services in terms of standards or
>> technologies, other than the web itself (which is OK given that 
>> "web" already appears in its name).
> 
> +1!
> 
> MB
> -- 
> Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
> http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
> 
> 

--
Jeff Mischkinsky                              jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
Consulting Member Technical Staff   +1(650)506-1975 (voice)
Oracle Corporation                          +1(650)506-7225 (fax)
400 Oracle Parkway, M/S 4OP960
Redwood Shores, CA 94065 USA
Received on Monday, 25 February 2002 10:16:56 GMT

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