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.


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

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

(image/png attachment: WSAStackDiagram.png)

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:06 UTC