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

RE: Some proposed definitions of "web service" based on the call toda y

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:37:25 -0700
Message-ID: <EDDE2977F3D216428E903370E3EBDDC908117E@MAIL01.stc.com>
To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

> I don't know if this will cover ebXML as within the
> scope of the WSA.  I'll guess that is will ... or at least will allow the
> ebXML folks to rigorously define how they differ from WSA v1.0, and perhaps
> WSA v 2.0 and ebXML v. whatever could be architecturally compatible down the
> road.  I'm leery of taking ebXML compatibility on as a requirement, however.

I have some serious doubts that, by giving a definition of Web services that does not conflict directly with what ebXML has today (e.g. not requiring WSDL), we will automatically comprehend ebXML in our architecture.

ebXML invokes a set of concept (e.g. CPP/CPAs, business semantics, repository, etc.) that so far have only been minimally addressed by this group, if not at all. Doing a serious work of comprehending ebXML in our architectural scope would involve, in my mind, carefully analyzing all those ebXML-specific concepts, compare them with our current scope, and (most likely) modify our scope and architectural model to include them. I suspect this goes well beyond what this group is chartered for at this time.

Missing this type of rigorous work, the attempt of making ebXML part of our Web services architecture by way of relaxing the Web services definition looks to me mostly like a marketing gimmick.

Ugo
Received on Friday, 18 April 2003 14:37:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:18 GMT