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

RE: Web Services specs + Rant

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:52:39 -0500
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E031327CF@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org, "Paul Denning" <pauld@mitre.org>

With respect to both these additions and the members of Paul's list that
I am not familiar with -- I don't think it is reasonable to add them to
an annotated list without some explanation of what they are.  And, to be
honest, for me personally an unadorned list of names and URL's is not
really very useful.

The information that I think is useful is:

1 - A high level description of what the spec is about and its
objectives.

2 - Status -  e.g. submitted to standards body, in WG, accepted by
standards body

3 - Implementations - some idea who and how much it is being
implemented.

4 - Relationship to other specs - are there other specs on the list that
have overlapping function?  If so, are they interoperable and
complementary (at least potentially) or basically competing?

I am getting the impression that there are basically two, or perhaps
three, independent stacks of competing specs.  As a representative of an
end user company, may I please say that I REALLY don't like this and it
makes me mad at ALL the companies involved?  Let me make it perfectly
clear that I am no more angry at your competitor than I am at you, but I
don't like any of you very much -- in this respect.

The Reliable Messaging situation is, in my view, particularly egregious.
There is, in my opinion, no good reason why the companies involved in
those two specs could not have played with each other -- and, again in
my opinion, the world does not need two non-interoperable Web services
reliable messaging specs.  I fail to see how anyone wins in this
situation.  Eventually I suppose it will sort itself out, but in the
meantime ... everybody loses.  At least, everybody that has a stake in
implementing Web services in B2B.  Maybe that leaves WalMart and AS2 the
potential winners.

As long as I'm talking about this, I might mention that the choreography
situation that everyone keeps talking about seems a lot less poisonous.
It seems to me that although those two efforts obviously have a lot of
overlap, there is also plausible differentiation and evidence of a good
faith effort to coordinate.  Aaannnd ... the need for the specs is a lot
less immediate than RM.  There's no point in doing choreography if you
can't get businesses to use Web services at all (for B2B), and without
RM you've got a pretty hard, maybe impossible, sell at square one.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Little [mailto:mark.little@arjuna.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 4:06 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org; Paul Denning
Subject: Re: Web Services specs



Here's a few more to add:

Arjuna/Fujitsu/IONA/Oracle/Sun Web Services Context
http://www.arjuna.com/library/specs/ws_caf_1-0/WS-CTX.pdf
Arjuna/Fujitsu/IONA/Oracle/Sun Web Services Coordination Framework
http://www.arjuna.com/library/specs/ws_caf_1-0/WS-CF.pdf
Arjuna/Fujitsu/IONA/Oracle/Sun Web Services Transaction Management
http://www.arjuna.com/library/specs/ws_caf_1-0/WS-TXM.pdf
Arjuna/Fujitsu/IONA/Oracle/Sun Web Services Composite Application
Framework
http://www.arjuna.com/library/specs/ws_caf_1-0/WS-CAF-Primer.pdf

Mark.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Denning" <pauld@mitre.org>
To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 9:06 PM
Subject: Web Services specs


>
> Here is a list that may be useful.  Not complete.  Some are not in 
> Roger's annotated list at 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2003Oct/0010.html
>
> Paul
>
> AT&T/BEA/Canon/Microsoft/SAP/ , SOAP Messages with Attachments, 1 Apr
2003,
>
http://dev2dev.bea.com/technologies/webservices/SOAP_Messages_Attachment
s.js
p
> BEA, SOAP Conversation Protocol (SOAP Conversation) 1.0, 13 Jun 2002, 
> http://dev2dev.bea.com/technologies/webservices/SOAPConversation.jsp
> BEA, WS-CallBack Protocol (WS-CallBack), 26 Feb 2003, 
> http://dev2dev.bea.com/technologies/webservices/WS-CallBack-0_9.jsp
> BEA, Web Service Acknowledgement Protocol (WS-Acknowledgement), 26 Feb

> 2003, 
> http://dev2dev.bea.com/technologies/webservices/WS-Acknowledgement-0_9
> .jsp
> BEA, Web Services Message Data (WS-MessageData), 26 Feb 2003,
> http://dev2dev.bea.com/technologies/webservices/WS-MessageData-0_9.jsp
> BEA/IBM/Microsoft, Business Process Execution Language for Web
Services,
> Version 1.0, 31 July 2002,
> http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-bpel/
> BEA/IBM/Microsoft, Web Services Addressing , March 2003,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2003/03/ws-addressing/
> BEA/IBM/Microsoft, Web Services Coordination (WS-Coordination),
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/08/WSCoor/
> BEA/IBM/Microsoft, Web Services Transaction (WS-Transaction), August
2002,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/08/wstx/
> BEA/IBM/Microsoft/TIBCO Software, "Web Services Reliable Messaging
> Protocol", March 2003,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2003/03/ws-reliablemessaging/
> DARPA, DAML-S (and OWL-S) 0.9 Draft Release, 2003-05,
> http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/0.9/
> Fujitsu/Hitachi/Oracle/Sonic/Sun, Web Services Reliability
(WS-Reliability)
> Ver1.0, 8 Jan 2003, http://www.sonicsoftware.com/wsreliability
> IBM, Web Services Flow Language (WSFL 1.0), May 2001, 
> http://www-3.ibm.com/software/solutions/webservices/pdf/WSFL.pdf
> IBM/Microsoft, WS-Attachments, 17 June 2002, 
> http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-attach.ht
> ml
> IBM/Microsoft/BEA/SAP, Web Services Policy Assertions Language
> (WS-PolicyAssertions), 18 December 2002,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/12/PolicyAssertions/
> IBM/Microsoft/BEA/SAP, Web Services Policy Attachment
> (WS-PolicyAttachment), 18 December 2002,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/12/PolicyAttachment/
> IBM/Microsoft/BEA/SAP, Web Services Policy Framework (WS-Policy), 18
> December 2002, http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/12/Policy/
> IBM/Microsoft/VeriSign, "Web Services Security (WS-Security)", 5 April
> 2002, http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/04/Security/
> IBM/Microsoft/VeriSign, "Web Services Security Addendum", Version 1.0,
18
> August 2002, http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/07/Security/
> IBM/Microsoft/VeriSign/RSA Security, Web Services Secure Conversation
> Language (WS-SecureConversation), Version 1.0, 18 December 2002,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/12/ws-secure-conversation/
> IBM/Microsoft/VeriSign/RSA Security, Web Services Security Policy
Language
> (WS-SecurityPolicy), Version 1.0, 18 December 2002,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/12/ws-security-policy/
> IBM/Microsoft/VeriSign/RSA Security, Web Services Trust Language
> (WS-Trust), Version 1.0, 18 December 2002,
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/ws/2002/12/ws-trust/
> IETF, HTTP Over TLS, RFC 2818, May 2000,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2818.txt
> IETF, Using the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks 
> Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP), RFC 3288,
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3288.txt
> ISO/IEC, Information Technology - Document Description and Processing 
> Languages, The XML Topic Maps (XTM) Syntax 1.1, JTC 1/SC34 N0398, 
> 2003-04-03, http://www.isotopicmaps.org/sam/sam-xtm/
> OASIS, Collaboration-Protocol Profile and Agreement Specification, 
> Version 2.0, OASIS ebXML Collaboration Protocol Profile and Agreement 
> Technical Committee, 23 September 2002 
> ,http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/204/ebcpp-2.0.pdf
> OASIS, Message Service Specification, Version 2.0, OASIS ebXML 
> Messaging Services Technical Committee, 1 April 2002, 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/documents/ebMS_v2_0.pdf
> OASIS, OASIS/ebXML Registry Information Model v2.0, Approved OASIS 
> Standard, OASIS/ebXML Registry Technical Committee, April 2002, 
> http://oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/documents/2.0/specs/ebrim.pdf
> OASIS, OASIS/ebXML Registry Services Specification v2.0, Approved 
> OASIS Standard, OASIS/ebXML Registry Technical Committee, April 2002, 
> http://oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/documents/2.0/specs/ebrs.pdf
> OASIS, Schema Centric XML Canonicalization, Version 1.0, 10 July 2002,

> http://uddi.org/pubs/SchemaCentricCanonicalization-20020710.htm
> OASIS, Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) v1.1, OASIS Standard,

> 2 September 2003,
>
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/3400/oasis-sstc-saml-1
.1-p
df-xsd.zip
> OASIS, Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML), 5 Nov 2002,
>
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/1383/oasis-sstc-saml-1
.0-p
df.zip
> OASIS, UDDI Version 3.0 Published Specification, 19 July 2002, 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tcspecs.htm#uddiv3
> OASIS, Universal Description, Discovery and Integration V2.0, 19 July
2002,
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/tcspecs.shtml#uddiv2
> OASIS, Web Services Security, 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/1204/doc-index.html
> OASIS, Web Services for Remote Portlets Specification, OASIS Standard,

> August 2003,
>
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/3343/oasis-200304-wsrp
-spe
cification-1.0.pdf
> OASIS, eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 1.0,
OASIS
> Standard, 18 February
>
2003,http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/940/oasis-xacml-1
.0.p
df
> OASIS-UN/CEFACT, ebXML Business Process Specification Schema (BPSS), 
> Version 1.01, 11 May 2001, http://www.ebxml.org/specs/ebBPSS.pdf
> W3C NOT, Web Services Conversation Language (WSCL) 1.0, 14 March 2002,

> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-wscl10-20020314/
> W3C NOTE, SOAP Messages with Attachments, 11 Dec 2000, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-attachments-20001211
> W3C NOTE, SOAP Version 1.2 Message Normalization, 28 March 2003, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/NOTE-soap12-n11n-20030328/
> W3C NOTE, SOAP: Simple Object Access Protocol 1.1, 08 May 2000, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/
> W3C NOTE, Web Service Choreography Interface (WSCI) 1.0, 8 August 
> 2002, http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-wsci-20020808
> W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Guide, W3C Candidate Recommendation 18 
> August 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-guide-20030818/
> W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Overview, W3C Candidate Recommendation,

> 18 August 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-features-20030818/
> W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Reference, W3C Candidate Recommendation

> 18 August 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-ref-20030818/
> W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax, W3C
Candidate
> Recommendation 18 August 2003, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-semantics-20030818/
> W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases, W3C Candidate 
> Recommendation,
18
> August 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-test-20030818/
> W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements, W3C 
> Candidate Recommendation 18 August 2003, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-webont-req-20030818/
> W3C, SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework, W3C Recommendation,

> 24 June 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part1-20030624/
> W3C, SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts, W3C Recommendation, 24 June 
> 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624/
> W3C, Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1, W3C Node, 15 March
2001,
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl-20010315
> W3C, Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 1.2 Part 1: Core

> Language, W3C Working Draft, 11 June 2003, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-wsdl12-20030611
> W3C, Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 1.2 Part 2: 
> Message Patterns, W3C Working Draft, 11 June 2003, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-wsdl12-patterns-20030611
> W3C, Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 1.2 Part 3:
Bindings,
> W3C Working Draft, 11 June 2003, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-wsdl12-bindings-20030611
> W3C, XML Encryption Syntax and Processing - W3C Recommendation, 10
December
> 2002, http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/PR-xmlenc-core-20021003/
> W3C, XML Key Management Specification (XKMS) - W3C Note, 30 March 
> 2001, http://www.w3.org/TR/xkms/ W3C, XML-Signature Syntax and 
> Processing - W3C Recommendation, 12 February 2002, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/
> Web Services Interoperability Organization, Basic Profile Version 
> 1.0a, Final Specification, 2003-08-08, 
> http://ws-i.org/Profiles/Basic/2003-08/BasicProfile-1.0a.html
> Web Services Interoperability Organization, Sample Application Supply
Chain
> Management Architecture, Version 1.0, 16 April 2003,
>
http://www.ws-i.org/SampleApplications/SupplyChainManagement/2003-04/SCM
Arch
itecture1.0-BdAD.pdf
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2003 10:55:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:23 GMT