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

RE: Updated status of D-AG0014, coordination / liaison outside W3C

From: Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:13:12 -0500
Message-ID: <E7AC4500EAB7A442ABA7521D18814397028D188A@tor-msg-01.northamerica.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Katia Sycara" <katia@cs.cmu.edu>, "Doug Bunting" <db134722@iPlanet.com>, "Public W/S Arch" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
> However, I have a question: why do we need to explicilty mention the
Technical Architecture Group?

 

I suggest you read the W3C TAG charter [1] to understand the central
role that the TAG has in defining the Web architecture.  I also suggest
you review the earlier emails in this thread [2-3] that proposed the
addition of an explicit reference to the TAG.

 

>? Is this a group within W3C or outside?

 

The W3C TAG was created by the W3C membership last year and the first
appointees and elected members were announced in Dec.  You can track the
work of the TAG at [4] and on its archived public email list [5].

 

> In either case, why explicitly mention it?

 

Simply because the TAG owns the responsibility for overall architecture
work at the W3C.   

 

/paulc

Chairman, XML Query WG

W3C Techncial Architecture Group Member 

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/07/19-tag 

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0153.html 

[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0155.html 

[4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ 

[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/ 

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
< <mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com> mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com>

-----Original Message-----
From: Katia Sycara [mailto:katia@cs.cmu.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Doug Bunting; Public W/S Arch
Subject: RE: Updated status of D-AG0014, coordination / liaison outside
W3C

 

Doug,

 I agree that D-AG0014 can be removed and replaced by the extended
D-AG0013 you proposed.

 

However, I have a question: why do we need to expliclty mention the
Technical Architecture Group? Is this a group within W3C or outside? In
either case, why explicitly mention it?

 Thanks, Katia

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Doug Bunting
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 6:11 PM
To: Public W/S Arch
Subject: Updated status of D-AG0014, coordination / liaison outside W3C

All, 

We've had a bit of discussion on this goal since my previous Status
email [1].  Unfortunately, even the small group of Hugo [2], Daniel [3]
and I [4] hasn't reached agreement.  (Or, maybe I'm just unconvinced.)
Hugo has chosen to put the debate aside until decided when describing
the status of D-AG0013, coordination within W3C [5]. 

In [4], I asked the following questions: 
1. whether "liaise" is in scope, 
2. whether working with outside groups is sufficiently distinct from
working with W3C for its own WSAWG goal, and 
3. whether such work is distinct from recognizing available technologies
from outside groups for its own WSAWG goal. 
4. whether "other groups doing Web services related work" in the current
text for D-AG0013 should be clarified to specifically encompass those
groups not part of the W3C. 

The text I was referring to in 4. was 

D-AG0013 "co-ordinate with other W3C Working Groups, the Technical
Architecture Group and other groups doing Web services related work in
order to maintain a coherent architecture for Web services."

Note: I've updated this to include David's point about the singularity
of the TAG [6]. 

If 3. (recognizing outside technologies) is part of goal D-AG0003 or
D-AG0011 or one of the others, this would be another reason to remove
D-AG0014. 

As it is, we definitely need more input on this goal and it is not clear
we're ready for critical success factors (even if I knew how to measure
or liaison ability).  The current text remains 

D-AG0014 "serve as liaison with groups outside W3C who are working on
web services in order to achive interoperability and reduce duplication
of effort"

I believe this goal should be removed and handled through the extension
to D-AG0013 previously discussed and captured above.  While "liaise" and
"coordinate" are somewhat different terms, the goal is the same.  Our
ability to meet any external liaison goals may be less than our ability
to perform coordination internal to W3C but this doesn't change our
aims.  If the group wishes to maintain this as a separate goal from
D-AG0013, I might suggest a parallel goal structure: 

D-AG0013 "co-ordinate with groups outside W3C doing Web services related
work in order to maintain a coherent architecture for Web services."

thanx, 
    doug 

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0206.html 
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0263.html 
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0218.html 
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0227.html 
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0376.html 
[6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0274.html 
  
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2002 11:13:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:56 GMT