- From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:10:45 -0700
- To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Mark, Very interesting. Thank you for following up on this. The only concern I have is that gateway is a term used in many contexts and at many levels on the network stack (e.g., in [1] IBM talks about a Web Services Gateway). So I am not completely sure what Henrik was referring to when he said "The first question is of course what a gateway is but if we strictly look at it from a SOAP node perspective ....". Ugo [1] http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-gateway/?dwzone =webservices -----Original Message----- From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:27 AM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Gateways FYI, Henrik responded to my question about "SOAP gateways". The thread is here; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Oct/thread.html#18 Like I said there, it's unfortunate the spec is written to prevent SOAP-nodes-that-are-gateways from being called intermediaries (or even "SOAP gateways"), because that necessarily makes the definition of SOAP intermediaries less useful - certainly a lot less useful than HTTP's use of the word, which is much more powerful and general. We can still talk about gateways in the context of the WSA, just not refer to them as "SOAP intermediaries" (because they aren't), nor "SOAP gateways" (because SOAP doesn't define that term). 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, 8 October 2002 12:11:26 UTC