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

RE: Words for the Triangles

From: Munter, Joel D <joel.d.munter@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:47:48 -0700
Message-ID: <ABEEEAB5C59AD51186D900508BB268B90F61F06B@fmsmsx102.fm.intel.com>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org

if you do not already have them, you still need to be able to "find" the
wsdl files.  that is what uddi is designed to do.  joel

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 10:41 AM
To: Ugo Corda
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: Words for the Triangles



By using UDDI that way, you've completely marginalized it!  Good job!
8-)

Seriously, everything UDDI would do for you in that case could be done
better with URIs and GET.  I think the de-facto standard WSDL-over-GET 
demonstrates that.

MB

On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 09:46:16AM -0700, Ugo Corda wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> If A and B are two partners in a B2B interaction, B could maintain a
private
> UDDI registry and A could be given access to it. So A's best way to access
B
> services' interfaces could be through B's UDDI.
> 
> I am not saying that it's the only way for A to communicate with B. I am
> just pointing out that the concept of UDDI as a third party dropped into
an
> otherwise pure P2P scenario is not that clearly cut in all cases.
> 
> Ugo

-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 16:48:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:06 GMT