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

RE: A priori requirement

From: Munter, Joel D <joel.d.munter@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 20:59:22 -0700
Message-ID: <ABEEEAB5C59AD51186D900508BB268B907C42881@fmsmsx102.fm.intel.com>
To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Hi Mark,
Are you recommending that a standard set of methods would be suggested (not
mandated) within our reference architecture for all web services?  If you
are, then would this list include methods such as a WbSversion, WbSreadme,
etc.?
Joel 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 7:50 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: A priori requirement


I *really* want to get this requirement in, but I'm not getting much in
the way of feedback.  I've provided clarification to Krishna and Anne,
and had Suresh's support, but nobody else has chimed in.  Do folks not
understand what I'm asking?  If not, let me try again.

Currently, Web services interfaces are described at runtime.  This is
fine and wonderful, but there's a problem with it; without existing
knowledge of what the methods in the WSDL do, you don't know how to
interact with it.  For example, if I discovered a Web service and found
that I could invoke the "asdfasdf", "weriuweroi", and "erer" methods, I
wouldn't know which one(s) to use unless I had that knowledge built-in,
or had a human nearby to interpret their meaning (and even then ...).

If we were to define or identify a set of methods (and faults) that
*all* Web services could implement, then we could address this problem,
at least as far as the expressive power of those methods/faults allowed.

This would in no way prevent people from defining specific methods, and
continuing to use WSDL.

Perhaps we could talk about this briefly on the call today.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 16 May 2002 23:59:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:59 GMT