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

RE: Nailing down the definition of "Web services" and the scope o f WS A for the document

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:42:51 -0400
To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org, www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF39278378.211836BA-ON85256D0B.00403EFE-85256D0B.0040572E@us.ibm.com>
I for one had the same thought, a Web service *has an* interface, it is
not an "is a" relationship in my book.

My $0.02,

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624

www-ws-arch-request@w3.org wrote on 04/16/2003 08:26:30 PM:

> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Walden Mathews [mailto:waldenm@optonline.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 5:37 PM
> > To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Nailing down the definition of "Web services" 
> > and the scope
> > of WS A for the document
> > 
> > 
> 
> > I would resist the temptation to define a service as an interface,
> > because I think the default understanding is that services *have*
> > interfaces, not that they *are* interfaces. 
> 
> Hmmm ... I think the way we (actually Eric) have recently defined it is
> clearer.  The code that does something in the real world might be a
> "service" (and for that matter, the humans that put the book in the box 
or
> load the truck, etc. might be the ones who perform the "service"), but I
> think it's useful to think of the *Web* service as the standard XML/URI
> interface to the service.  That way the Web service can be neutral with
> respect to whether the "service" involves bits, atoms, humans, or 
whatever
> ... it's all just about XML and URIs.
> 
> Maybe Eric could remind us  of the rest of his reasoning ....
> > 
> 
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2003 07:43:08 GMT

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