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

RE: Polls (was RE: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2))

From: He, Hao <Hao.He@thomson.com.au>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 23:20:20 +1000
Message-ID: <686B9E7C8AA57A45AE8DDCC5A81596AB046AE600@sydthqems01.int.tisa.com.au>
To: "'Champion, Mike '" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Well said and that is what I have put in the text for 2.2.21.  

Hao 

-----Original Message-----
From: Champion, Mike
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Sent: 7/2/03 6:27 PM
Subject: RE: Polls (was RE: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2))


All those trout I just mailed you will smell pretty bad by the time they
get
to Australia :-)

But seriously, I think that the reality is that raw HTTP+XML is a useful
way
of providing, uhh, "services over the Web" in situations where SOAP is
overkill.  A simple Amazon.com interface may be one such situation.  I
for
one don't quarrel with anything in that article.  Obviously SOAP 1.2
lowers
the "barriers to entry" further by supporting the GET web method.

I wish we could get past this "WSA demands that you use SOAP and WSDL"
idea.
All WSA is saying is that if one wants to support the Requirements that
go
beyond what Tim O'Reilly is talking about -- reliability, transactions,
choreography, encryption, signatures, authentication, authorization,
etc. --
then we Recommend that one use the SOAP extension model and the WSDL
description model. It's not that we're saying "HTTP+XML is not a real
Web
service", we're saying "to go beyond what you can do with raw HTTP+XML,
we
Recommend that you use the WSA framework, which is based on SOAP and
WSDL."



> -----Original Message-----
> From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:47 AM
> To: 'Champion, Mike'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Polls (was RE: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2))
> 
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/3005
> 
> Did I just make myself unpopular by posting this link?
> 
> Hao
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 6:16 PM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Polls (was RE: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2))
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Francis McCabe [mailto:fgm@fla.fujitsu.com]
> > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 1:44 PM
> > To: Hao He
> > Cc: 'David Orchard'; 'Ugo Corda'; 'Anne Thomas Manes'; 
> > www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Proposed text for 2.2.21 (take 2)
> > 
> > 
> > I think the group should vote on this. This is the same 
> thing that has 
> > been debated again and again; it is time to put it to bed.
> 
> Vote on what?  The text for the "message" concept that Hao is 
> working on?
> Or the trout-pond-from-RESTifarian-hell "is a plain XML 
> message without SOAP
> headers a Web service?"   We have a new ability to create straw polls
> easily, so please propose some wording.  (Any chronically 
> festering issue is fine, and I'm asking the group not just Frank)
> 
> 


Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 09:18:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:21 GMT