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

RE: Resolution of Web Services Architecture Issues 27 and 28

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 20:12:25 -0600
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E01817DBF@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "Walden Mathews" <waldenm@optonline.net>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, distobj@acm.org
cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org

Somehow I feel empowered to answer: "YES!!"  IT IS DAMN WELL TOO LATE to
add a normative input, as in a modification to our charter involving
scope or technical constraints.  This WG has been working for ... What?
A year and a half now?  It was chartered to do its job in two years or
maybe it was 2.5 -- I don't know.  I sort of remember 18 months, but I
think that was wishful thinking.


Of course, I have no standing whatsoever to make that answer, other than
deep feelings, and in fact I am empowered by nothing but passion.

As for the specific issue at hand -- I think the opinion of many people
is that the OSI stack is a very fine thing, and one can certainly learn
from it by analogy and of course one needs to be compatible with it ...
But that's very easy because it's specifically referring to a different
thing and everything we are doing is in one layer on top or something
like that.  I think that everyone concerned would be very happy to hear
your ideas about how the OSI stack can inspire, guide or even constrain
the WS Architecture -- in the context of getting that architecture
articulated.  Please feel more than welcome to show us how to apply it
in a useful way to whatever issues are in scope at the time as we

Again, the above statements are empowered by nothing but passion.

I need a vacation.  Fortunately, I am on a plane tomorrow morning.

-----Original Message-----
From: Walden Mathews [mailto:waldenm@optonline.net] 
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 7:38 PM
To: Champion, Mike; distobj@acm.org
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: Resolution of Web Services Architecture Issues 27 and 28

> time devoted to addressing this murky question would not be 
> well-spent.
> any event, the OSI reference model is *not* a normative input to this 
> WG, and we consider its applicability to be mainly heuristic rather 
> than

Sometimes you can do the right thing without resorting to formality,
though. If the WG would apply the OSI (or other equivalent) model *in
earnest* to its work, whether formally motivated or not, I would find
that satisfying.

I was going through the training materials for the MCSA recently, and at
the basic level of networking I encountered, yet again the OSI model,
and was reminded of this discussion.  It's that ubiquitous; you can't
just toss it aside on a formality.  Well, you can, but it's going to
make for some bad puzzles down the road, I think.

Is it too late to add a normative input?

Received on Thursday, 3 April 2003 21:14:17 UTC

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