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

RE: The stack diagram (was RE: Discussion topic for tomorrow's call)

From: Mario Jeckle <mario@jeckle.de>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 20:11:49 +0200
Message-ID: <3E906DE5.4010500@jeckle.de>
To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
CC: www-ws-arch@w3.org, hugo@w3.org, Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk, RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com
Hi Mike,

 >We had a "3 stack"  diagram in an earlier version of the WSA document:
 >http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/arch/wsa/3Stack.gif that I 
 >provides a better visual framework than what we are talking about here.
Actually, I think this diagram (although quite useful as a starting 
point) could be some kind of misleading.
First, as Eric indicated, it looks merely like an execution flow thank 
like an architectural stack.
Second, neither "XSD" nor "Choreography" are sub parts of WSDL. Hence, 
I'm against including them into the WSDL box. Furthermore, "Security" is 
not part of SOAP (even taking SOAP extensions into account) and should 
therefore not be shown inside the respective box. Since we agreed to 
look at security as an vertical issue (which is perfectly true from my 
point of view) we should stack it outside all other boxes, i.e. 
architecture layers.

> I don't want to stock the trout pond, but I've thrown together a diagram
> that I think captures the features I like from both Dave Orchard's (?)
> 3stack diagram and Mario's.  I can certainly live with Mario's, but I like
> the idea of having the messaging and description stuff side by side so that
> it doesn't look like description is layered on top of messaging.  
Hm ... Considering WSDL's very nature it is stacked on top of messaging 
(or it least it should be).
I think our architecture should outline some kind of a proposed or ideal 
  WS architecture. Therefore I think we should suggest to our (millions 
of ;-) spec. readers to use WSDL after defining SOAP messages even if 
they're not required to do so.

 >I like that.  It's beginning to look three dimensional.
Good point! Sure, the XML base technology is underlying all XML 
technologies listed within the diagram. Even some potential vertical 
aspects of the architecture also rely on XML technologies (e.g. XML 
Digital Signatures).
Perhaps Hugo's color coded suggestion could be an option. But I think it 
could suggest to the reader that all parts inside the nice colored big 
box are parts of XML base technology ...

Putting the ideas together I updated the diagram to
a) show that WSDL and Aggreagation are directly based on XML base 
b) Description can (if you really want to) be done without Messaging.


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: StackDiagram.png)

Received on Sunday, 6 April 2003 14:12:09 UTC

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