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

Re: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary

From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 11:51:28 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030218220639.03737b80@localhost>
To: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org

Great work Hugo!  My suggestions:

1. artifact
The current definition seems too specific to OO analysis (which is 
understandable, given that it was taken from a Rational book):
[[
A piece of information that (1) is produced, modified, or used by a 
process, (2) defines an area of responsibility, and (3) is subject to 
version control. An artifact can be a model, a model element, or a 
document. A document can enclose other documents. [RUP]
]]
I suggest instead:
[[
A piece of digital information.   An artifact may be any size, and may be 
composed of other artifacts.  Examples of artifacts: a message; a URI; an 
XML document; a PNG image; a bit stream.
]]

2. a priori information
I suggest eliminate this term from the glossary.  There is an issue 
regarding the INTENT of that term in the architecture document, and that 
issue does need to be resolved.  But the term itself is not meant in any 
special sense that is specific to Web services.  I think the way to resolve 
the issue is to add more explanation to our architecture document, rather 
than defining any special meaning for the term.

3. conversation
The current wording is
[[
conversation
A logical collection of messages exchanged between communicating parties.
]]
but the word "collection" normally does not retain sequencing 
information.  I suggest changing it to:
[[
conversation
A logical sequence of messages exchanged between communicating parties.
]]

4. operation
We might want to tie this definition to the definition of MEP.  I suggest 
changing
[[
A set of messages related to a single Web service action. [WSD Reqs]
]]
to
[[
A sequence of messages, related by a particular message exchange pattern, 
that are associated with a single, logical Web service action.
]]

5. service-oriented architecture
Current wording:
[[
A set of components which can be invoked, and whose interfaces can be 
published and discovered.
]]
This definition seems vague.  One minor suggestion:
[[
A set of components which can be invoked, and whose interface descriptions 
can be published and discovered.
]]

6. attribute
Do we need this definition?  Is it specific to Web services?  Is there a 
question of how it relates to Web services?  I think not, though there 
isn't a big harm in retaining it.

7. conversation
[[
A logical collection of messages exchanged between communicating parties.
]]
Again, I suggest s/collection/sequence/

8. metric
[[
A metric is an attribute of an architectural component that may be defined 
during the configuration of the architectural component, can be measured 
during the use of this architecture component, and whose value may be 
evaluated.
]]
Do we need this definition?  I guess I don't see the need for a definition 
of "metric" that is specific to Web services.

9. state
Do we need to define "state"?  I don't think we need a definition of 
"state" that is specific to Web services.

10.  synchronous
[[
Property of an interaction whose results are directly following the 
interaction.
]]
I suggest adding:
[[
An interaction between an initiator and a respondent is synchronous if the 
initiator blocks some further processing while it waits for a corresponding 
action, response or acknowledgement from the respondent.
]]

11. declarative
I suggest deleting this term, since I don't think we need to give it any 
meaning that is specific to Web services.

12. procedural
I suggest deleting this term also.

13. Turing complete
I suggest deleting this term also.

14. actor
[[
A legal entity — such as a person or a corporation — that may be the owner 
of agents that either seek to use Web services or provide Web services.
]]
I think we should use a different term for this concept.  I would suggest 
the using the term "legal entity" for the above concept.  For the term 
"actor" I suggest using the following definition:
[[
A physical or conceptual entity that can perform actions.  Examples: 
people; companies; machines; running software.  An actor can take on (or 
implement) one or more roles.  An actor at one level of abstraction may be 
viewed as a role at a lower level of abstraction.
]]

15. role
[[
The named specific behavior of an entity participating in a particular 
context. A role may be static (e.g., an association end) or dynamic (e.g., 
a collaboration role). [UML]
]]
I think the current definition (above) is too specific to UML.  I suggest:
[[
An abstract entity that has a particular set of responsibilities or 
behaviors.  A role must be implemented by one or more actors.  Compare "actor".
]]

16. intermediary
[[
Node taking part into a message exchange between a client and a Web service.
]]
I suggest:
[[
A Node is an intermediary if messages from the client pass through the 
intermediary on their way to the Web service, or vice versa.
]]

17. provider
[[
A business entity that sells access to or use of Web services. [WSIA Glossary]
]]
I don't think this needs to be a *business* entity, nor do I think it has 
to *sell* access.  I suggest instead:
[[
A legal entity that provides a Web service. [WSIA Glossary]
]]

18. requester
[[
A system entity making use of a Web service.
]]
I think this should be changed to be the complement of "provider":
[[
A legal entity that wishes to make use of a Web service though a client.
]]




At 10:15 AM 2/14/2003 +0100, Hugo Haas wrote:
>All,
>
>Here is the URL of a new snapshot of the glossary:
>
> 
>http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/arch/glossary/wsa-glossary.html?rev=1.32&content-type=text/html&only_with_tag=edcopy_2003021401
>
>. . . .

-- 
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2003 11:51:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT