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

RE: new editor's draft of WSA available

From: Munter, Joel D <joel.d.munter@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:04:33 -0700
Message-ID: <ABEEEAB5C59AD51186D900508BB268B916238082@fmsmsx102.fm.intel.com>
To: W3C WS Architecture <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Several weeks ago, I completed a review of Heather's draft "Discovery Words"
before they were incorporated into the WSA draft material.  I see in this
latest publication that my suggestions and comments were ignored and the
issues that I addressed with my comments are still present.  I have re-issue
them here for your reference.  Please consider these comments.
 
Original Comments:
Portal UDDI Registry: The following sentence seems a touch awkward. "A
portal UDDI registry runs in the service provider's outside the firewall or
in a DMZ between firewalls." Please consider adding the word "environment"
between provider's and outside. There is the beginning of discussion of
"role-based" visibility here also. There is a similar capability that is
now defined within the UDDI specification itself and should be expected
within vendor-based tools and future registries. 
 
This comment "...complete business context and well thought out taxonomies
are essential if the service is to be found be potential service
requestors..." which you have associated with just the [public] UDDI
Business Registry absolutely applies equally to all forms and usages of
registries.
 
Acquiring Service Descriptions: This statement "...Internal Enterprise
Application UDDI registries and Partner Catalog UDDI registries will require
no pre screening to establish trust of the service..." is not true. I might
host a web service within my enterprise and still need to establish a level
of working "trust" with (internal) users of the service.
 
I like to describe WSIL as getting a business card from someone that I have
already met or someone that I have been introduced to. The "business card"
provides a rich set of very specific information. If you agree with this
analogy, then you might want to add something to that affect.
 
Joel
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 9:44 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: new editor's draft of WSA available



All, 

I've incorporated Eric and Heather's material with some tweaks. I have also
included the harvesting 
material as is (so we don't forget it:) I haven't included the management
material as yet 
because I understand that the MGT TF wants to noodle on that work some more
before 
they are ready to have it integrated (requiring a format change to XML). I
believe that they 
want to defer this until after the f2f. 

Anyway, here's the latest WSA: 

 
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/arch/wsa/wd-wsa-arch.html 

As always, comments welcomed. Note that I still need to update some of the
graphics 
to reflect naming changes we have (I think) settled on to a certain extent.
Please let's 
not get sucked into the vortex of endless debating over terms simply because
I was 
only able to find older representations of certain graphics. These will be
updated! 

Remember, this is ONLY A DRAFT! :) 

Cheers, 

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624


attached mail follows:



Hi Heather,

Is this what you are intending for inclusion into the WSAWG spec?  If so,
then please include it and let's just review one document.  I would like to
see the graphics.

Line numbers would help when providing comments.

While WSDL is absolutely preferred, there are other mechanisms for discovery
of a web service's methods and input and output parameters.  For instance,
Microsoft tools offer "reflection."  Maybe we should just state that WSDL is
preferred.

Portal UDDI Registry: The following sentence seems a touch awkward.  "A
portal UDDI registry runs in the service provider's outside the firewall or
in a DMZ between firewalls."  Please consider adding the word "environment"
between provider's and outside.  There is the beginning of discussion of
"role-based" visibility here also.  There is a similar capability that is
now defined within the UDDI specification itself and should be expected
within vendor-based tools and future registries. 
 
This comment "...complete business context and well thought out taxonomies
are essential if the service is to be found be potential service
requestors..." which you have associated with just the [public] UDDI
Business Registry absolutely applies equally to all forms and usages of
registries.

Acquiring Service Descriptions: This statement "...Internal Enterprise
Application UDDI registries and Partner Catalog UDDI registries will require
no pre screening to establish trust of the service..." is not true.  I might
host a web service within my enterprise and still need to establish a level
of working "trust" with (internal) users of the service.

I like to describe WSIL as getting a business card from someone that I have
already met or someone that I have been introduced to.  The "business card"
provides a rich set of very specific information.  If you agree with this
analogy, then you might want to add something to that affect.

Joel


-----Original Message-----
From: Heather Kreger [mailto:kreger@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 2:06 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Discovery words 






Folks,
Here are the words I had for what I called the Registry Stack. I tried to
rename it to the Discovery Agency (I'm still uncomfortable with this
name... any other ideas?).  Again, these words are plaguerized from our Web
Services Conceptual Architecture paper (http://www.ibm.com/webservices,
click on resources and scroll down).  Of course this is just a starter
set...

(See attached file: HKsContribution.discoveryagency.htm)

Heather Kreger
Web Services Lead Architect
STSM, SWG Emerging Technology
kreger@us.ibm.com
919-543-3211 (t/l 441)  cell:919-496-9572
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 14:04:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:09 GMT