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

Re: [RTF] Behavior definition of Services - public discussion

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 13:50:46 -0400
To: rrw <rrw@semiramis.org.uk>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020709135046.B1753@www.markbaker.ca>

On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 05:19:34PM +0100, rrw wrote:
>  To my mind, this is a retrograde step (web services may not be
>  semantic, but they ought to be dynamic - it's very hard to come up
>  with tools that do dynamic code generation sensibly), and so I think

Yep.

>  we ought to make a stand against entrenching these programming styles
>  - even if only symbolically, though I admit that this is likely to
>  be controversial (maybe too controversial for a standard ?).

We've got this draft requirement, which should take care of that.  Those
who want to re-invent CORBA will be free to have fun trying, but the
architecture will define (if this is accepted) a generic interface that
can be assumed to be implemented on all Web services, dramatically
lowering coordination costs (like HTTP does, coincidentally 8-).

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/arch/2/06/wd-wsa-reqs-20020605.html#ar003.6

>  To some extent, the whole semantics issue is a red herring: If we end
>  up with a sensible specification, automated reasoning on it ought to
>  be fairly easy with no need for further standardisation (you wouldn't
>  want to standardise the algorithms anyway).

Yep.  Bootstrap, ala the Semantic Web.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 13:39:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:01 GMT