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

RE: Nomenclature

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 19:59:09 -0400
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E405D62CBB@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
> [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2003 5:42 PM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Nomenclature
> 
> 
> 
> It seems obvious to me at this point that the WG is going to insist on
> "branding" Web services with WSDL and SOAP -- and maybe that's a good
> thing.  Nonetheless, I think that there is a need for some sort of
> nomenclature to describe the "other stuff" that is app<->app using
> standard Web messaging.  

I agree.  I think there's a range of "other stuff" though.  

Some suggestions .... basically let's let the word "service" imply
app<->communication using standards, and the "Web" prefix mean SOAP+WSDL
app<->app communication (counter-intuitive, but the marketing people have
claimed this nomenclature and there does seem to be a consensus that it is
our scope!):

-- "automated web application" (regular 'ol HTML form / CGI that one might
automate or screen scrape with code).  

-- "HTTP service"  (a service built using REST principles but without
explicit SOAP/WSDL.  Or maybe we want to say "REST service" uses the REST
principles and "HTTP service" uses HTTP in an ad-hoc way.  I personally
don't want to get into this doctrinal distinction, but wouldn't lay down in
the road ...)

-- "minimal Web service" (uses SOAP or WSDL but not both)

-- "XML service"  (uses a custom XML protocol / description rather than
SOAP/WSDL) ... a RESTful one might be an "XML HTTP service").
Received on Saturday, 7 June 2003 19:59:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:20 GMT