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

Re: Proposed text on reliability in the web services architecture

From: Miles Sabin <miles@milessabin.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:54:29 +0000
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-Id: <200301221354.29989.miles@milessabin.com>

Assaf Arkin wrote,
> Miles Sabin wrote,
> > So there's a gap between the parties which are making the visible
> > commitments (the WS adapters) and the parties which are ultimately
> > responsible for meeting them (the endpoints). Whether that gap is
> > narrow and/or easily bridged, or an all consuming abyss is likely
> > to vary on a case-by-case basis. I'm sure many of us on this list
> > have experienced both.
>
> You have to decide what is the service and what is the application.
> If you have a message handler there that allows your application to
> receive messages over HTTP, the message handler is not the service.
> It's a proxy that takes care of the HTTP/SOAP/etc details on behalf
> of the actual service.

That's the ideal, certainly.

But the reality is that this is often very hard to do. In a not 
completely implausible senario we might have, say, seven largely 
independent organizations involved: the legacy system vendor, the two 
sites which deploy that system, two consultancies providing the WS 
gateways (one at each site), each using a WS toolkit from a different 
WS tool vendor.

In such circumstances clarity on the boundary between service and 
application is going to take a lot of work. If differences of opinion 
or outlook, or miscommunication, show through in the protocol or the 
way the protocol is used, then RM is likely to be the least of anyone's 
worries.



Cheers,


Miles
Received on Wednesday, 22 January 2003 08:55:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:13 GMT