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

RE: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary

From: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:18:44 -0800
To: "Ugo Corda" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, "Cutler, Roger \(RogerCutler\)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, "Walden Mathews" <waldenm@optonline.net>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <IGEJLEPAJBPHKACOOKHNMEPCDDAA.arkin@intalio.com>

I think we'll need a generic definition of synchronous if only to be able to
say that there are sync/aynch protocols, synch/asynch operations and
synch/asynch interactions (in choreography).

But I agree that we also need a concrete definition that relates to WSDL
operations, distinguishing between synch and asynch operations (what you
call the SOAP level). Eventually that determines which protocols are used
and how, and also how these operations are combined in the choreography.

arkin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Ugo Corda
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 12:34 PM
> To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); Walden Mathews; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary
>
>
>
> I think part of the difficulty here is trying to define
> synchronous and asynchronous the same way across different
> levels. As Assaf said in a previous note, synchronous and
> asynchronous can have different specific meanings depending on
> the scope/layer/context we are referring to.
> In our case, we should give a definition that applies at the
> level I would roughly call the SOAP level. Not at the
> transport/transfer level. Not at the choreography level.
> That's the level I had in mind when I sent out [1].
>
> > Sooooo -- I am really wondering how one can make an
> > asynchronous message
> > out of synchronous components.
>
> The usual example is two HTTP requests making up a single
> request-response interaction. I think everybody agrees that HTTP
> is a synchronous protocol at the transport/transfer level.
> Nevertheless, the whole interaction would be asynchronous at the
> SOAP request-response level if you follows a definition like the
> one I gave at [1]..
>
> Ugo
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2003Feb/0261.html
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> > [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 12:25 PM
> > To: Walden Mathews; Ugo Corda; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary
> >
> >
> > That's a really good idea.  Using your suggestions from
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2003Feb/0300.html:
> >
> > If synchronous means "blocking", then it you block you block -- you
> > cannot create an unblocked interaction out of blocking interactions --
> > so under that meaning you can't build an asynch out of synch's.
> >
> > If synchronous means solicited, then again I don't see how one can
> > combine solicited messages to create an unsolicited one.
> >
> > If, however, synchronous means "relatively short time" (which most
> > people on this thread seem to think is not a good idea), then I guess
> > you can put together a bunch of messages that take a short time into a
> > whole that takes a long time.  This seems, however, relatively trivial
> > and maybe it illustrates why people don't seem to like the
> > "short time"
> > approach.
> >
> > Even if you go to Mr. Arkin's rather formal definition which, if I
> > understand it, says that a message is synchronous if it is
> > possible for
> > people on the two ends to agree what time it is -- it still
> > seems to me
> > that if you compose a message out of a bunch of messages
> > where you know
> > what time it is, in the composite it still should be possible
> > to figure
> > out what time it is.
> >
> > Sooooo -- I am really wondering how one can make an
> > asynchronous message
> > out of synchronous components.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Walden Mathews [mailto:waldenm@optonline.net]
> > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:48 PM
> > To: Ugo Corda; Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary
> >
> >
> > Er, especially if no one agrees on what these terms actually
> > mean.  Ugo,
> > would it be possible for you to restate what you said below without
> > using either 'synch' term?  Maybe if each of us tried that
> > once or twice
> > we might get to a better place?
> >
> > WM
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ugo Corda" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
> > To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>;
> > <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:38 PM
> > Subject: RE: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >Incidentally, in one of the earlier go-arounds on this subject I
> > > >believe that it was pointed out that one can build a synchronous
> > > >interaction out of asynchronous components.
> > >
> > > And vice-versa, one could build an asynchronous interaction out of
> > synchronous components.
> > >
> > > Ugo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 16:20:16 GMT

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