W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Discussion topic for tomorrow's call

From: Mario Jeckle <mario@jeckle.de>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 20:29:58 +0200
Message-ID: <3E8B2C26.4010104@jeckle.de>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> I agree. I don't think that we should hint that it is more important
> in one particular area since security needs to be applied everywhere
> and attacks happen where the security is the weakest, basically where
> it won't be mentioned. So mentioning it only in some places is wrong
> IMO, and mentioning it everywhere will clutter the diagram.
Ok, that makes sense to me.

> One comment though: I would drop all the WS prefixes since:
> - we are talking about Web services indeed.
> - the existence of specifications with resembling names is confusing;
>   for example, one might wonder if WS Security on the right
>   WS-Security or something else. I think that this particular diagram
>   should stay fairly abstract.
Good point. Honestly, looking the first time at the diagram I was also
wondering why "WS-Security" (the Spec!) was mentioned. I think dropping
the WS prefix makes it more readable and less confusing.

Mario

-- 
Prof. Mario Jeckle
University of Applied Sciences Furtwangen
Dept. Business Applications of Computer Science

W3C Representative of DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology

URL: http://www.jeckle.de
MailTo:mario@jeckle.de
MailTo:jeckle@fh-furtwangen.de

My public key: http://www.jeckle.de/marioJeckle.pgp



WSAStackDiagram.png
(image/png attachment: WSAStackDiagram.png)

Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2003 13:30:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:17 GMT