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

Re: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary

From: Walden Mathews <waldenm@optonline.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 18:56:24 -0500
To: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-id: <004401c2dc60$573a39c0$1702a8c0@WorkGroup>

Ugo,

Respectfully, I think it's possible to do better than that, but not if
management has decided to crank up the schedule pressure: adopt
something and move on.

Walden

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ugo Corda" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>; "Walden
Mathews" <waldenm@optonline.net>; <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:34 PM
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 19:24:24 GMT

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