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

RE: Web Services Definition and XML

From: Krishna Sankar <ksankar@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 09:59:29 -0800
To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000601c1c538$a9647ca0$950d47ab@amer.cisco.com>
Hi,

	Actually we are going thru the Form-Norm-Storm-Perform stages of
group theory. Hopefully we would get out of the storm mode soon and stay
in the perform mode for the rest of the time !

	Also the discussions around the definition are healthy to get to
a common shared understanding. 

cheers

 | -----Original Message-----
 | From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]
On
 | Behalf Of Sandeep Kumar
 | Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 8:14 AM
 | To: Heather Kreger; www-ws-arch@w3.org; Krishna Sankar
 | Subject: RE: Web Services Definition and XML
 | 
 | Hi Guys,
 | 
 | Can we agree that this WS Defintion *could* be revised after we have
made
 | some
 | progress on other fronts? If so, let us move with this WS defintion,
and
 | revisit it later.
 | 
 | However, if we cannot make changes, given that the defintion would be
 | visible to
 | people outside this committee, and they may make progress, then we
should
 | *violently* :)
 | argue and nail it down for good.
 | 
 | 
 | Regards,
 | Sandeep
 | 
 | -----Original Message-----
 | From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
 | Behalf Of Heather Kreger
 | Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 8:03 AM
 | To: www-ws-arch@w3.org; Krishna Sankar
 | Subject: RE: Web Services Definition and XML
 | 
 | 
 | I agree with Krishna on this. Lets define Web Services broadly here.
We
 | don't need the word XML all through it.  If we want to
 | qualify "standards based description" to  "standards based XML
 | description"
 | I can live with that.
 | 
 | I think that the architecture we define will have XML all over it as
we
 | identify technologies to fill the various roles and aspects we
define.
 | I don't want to say right now that if the bits on the wire aren't XML
or
 | weren't derived from XML you don't get to be a web service.  What and
 | how things go on the wire is part of the architecture... not the
 | definition.
 | 
 | IMO, I think if we restrict it to XML on the wire we throw out LOTS
of
 | very
 | interesting real world, business use cases... creating divergence as
 | vendors go elsewhere for technology and architecture. We would be
 | throwing
 | out our 'existing art' as well with SOAP attachments and MIME. Those
 | attachments
 | aren't XML.  We would be drastically restricting the applicability of
Web
 | services to the enterprise integration problem if we restrict the
wire to
 | XML. WSDL does not restrict the wire to XML. The industry is looking
for
 | guidance on Web Services Architecture, lets not dismiss a bunch of
them
 | right off the bat.
 | 
 | Small suggestion for progress...after we get through the defining the
 | requirements on Chris' schedule, we will get to define the
architecture...
 | I think this is when we should nail this down.
 | 
 | Heather
 | 
 | "Krishna Sankar" <ksankar@cisco.com>@w3.org on 03/04/2002 10:50:41 PM
 | 
 | Sent by:    www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
 | 
 | 
 | To:    <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
 | cc:
 | Subject:    RE: Web Services Definition and XML
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | Dave,
 | 
 |  | The charter seems extremely clear that web services must be based
upon
 | XML.
 | <KS>
 |  I reread the charter. To me the charter does not imply either that
our
 | *definition* of web services must be based on XML not XML as the
*sole*
 | implementation of web services.
 | 
 |  It only says that the set of technologies *identified* by this WG
should
 | be
 | based on XML. It also says that the WG does not have to design the
 | technologies. As an extreme case, another WG or a later version can
 | identify
 | a very different stack of technologies, based on our definitions.
 | 
 |  In this sense, define as broadly as required and identify a set of
XML
 | technologies to implement that definition, is our marching order. So
if
 | we
 | define web services as "using standard interfaces and using internet
 | protocols" we are covered. We need to identify WSDL and SOAP as the
 | description and message technologies.
 | 
 |  BTW, the frequency of the word XML is irrelevant here.
 | </KS>
 | 
 | cheers
 | 
 |  | -----Original Message-----
 |  | From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
 |  | Behalf Of David Orchard
 |  | Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 3:23 PM
 |  | To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
 |  | Subject: Web Services Definition and XML
 |  |
 |  |
 |  | I wanted to discuss a specific aspect of Web Services definition
on a
 |  | separate thread, particularly the use of XML.
 |  |
 |  | If one takes a look at the charter of the Web Services
Architecture
 |  group
 |  | [1], the word XML is the 4th word in the text.  The first 7
sentences
 |  | mention XML 7 times.  I'm counting as one the XML, XML
 |  | Namespaces, and XML
 |  | Schema fragment.
 |  |
 |  | Further, the 2nd goal is "The set of technologies identified
 |  | must be based
 |  | on XML. ".
 |  | The 6th bulleted goal is "The framework proposed must support the
kind
 |  of
 |  | extensibility actually seen on the Web: disparity of document
formats
 |  and
 |  | protocols used to communicate, mixing of XML vocabularies using
XML
 |  | namespaces, development of solutions in a distributed
 |  | environment without a
 |  | central authority, etc. "...
 |  |
 |  | The charter seems extremely clear that web services must be
 |  | based upon XML.
 |  |
 |  | Now I'm a person that leans towards sometimes re-interpreting
 |  | charters, but
 |  | I draw the line in the sand on this one.  I believe that the Web
 |  Services
 |  | definition MUST make explicit reference to XML.  Perhaps the
 |  | actual bits on
 |  | the wire don't have to be XML - like using SSL or GZIP - but the
 |  | basis for
 |  | the inputs and outputs of the service sure have to be XML or a
well
 |  | understood transformation.  I also include a packaging of XML
 |  | into something
 |  | like MIME or DIME as being XML based.
 |  |
 |  | Like I argued for URIs, I will also argue for XML in our
 |  | definition.  This
 |  | is a show-stopper.
 |  |
 |  | Cheers,
 |  | Dave
 |  | [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/01/ws-arch-charter
 |  |
 |  |
 | 
 | 
 | 
Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2002 13:00:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:55 GMT