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

Re: Messaging Service Layer

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 13:07:10 -0500
To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <20030218130710.M19708@www.markbaker.ca>

On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0500, Champion, Mike wrote:
> I'm just not seeing this thread going anywhere.  Mark and Walden seem to
> want some genuflection to the non-normative (either in W3C or IETF) 7-layer
> model.  Others say that this is pointless because everything we're talking
> about is essentially at the "application" layer.  The counter-argument that
> one doesn't NEED HTTP, SMTP, etc to do web serivces message "transport"
> because it could go over TCP/IP directly misses the point that what we're
> doing is required to be protocol-neutral.  

Protocol independance/neutrality can be achieved in two ways; by
treating application protocols as a transport protocol (the preferred
approach, apparently), or by extending application protocols (the
"chameleon" approach).  Failing to make this distinction, while using
the existence of the requirement to justify ignoring a proven model that
may help to explain it, is a nasty catch-22.

I am in the process of writing a short essay on the subject.  I'll let
the group know when I'm done.

> How about if Mark or Walden just submit an issue against the next public
> draft of the WSA document so that we make sure that we say SOMETHING about
> it (suggest wording, even) so we can get on with more pressing topics?

Sure, sounds good.  I'll do that.  But I'm not going to suggest
text, because I believe that any wording that defends such a
position is prima facie incorrect.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 13:04:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:14 GMT