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

RE: Web Services specs

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 11:41:30 -0500
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E031327D1@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "Paul Denning" <pauld@mitre.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org

Agree.  With both points.  I'd like to see a diagram that shows me what
is where and who overlaps with whom -- but if possible including only
the major players.  Like, what about the SPML think I included in my
list even though I couldn't figure out what it was?  As far as I can
tell not too many people care about this spec very much -- at least
nobody has cared enough to explain to me what the heck it is, although
it apparently does have some implementation.

Defining the "major players", however, is going to be pretty tough, I
think.  What about this:  It seems to me that there are three broad
classes of specs:

1 - Things from standards bodies, or perhaps de facto standards, that
"everybody" uses (e.g. SOAP).

2 - Reasonably coherent stacks that probably conflict with each other
(e.g. BEA/IBM/Microsoft, Arjuna/Fujitsu/IONA/Oracle/Sun, ebXML, Liberty
Alliance)

3 - Other (e.g. SPML?? -- or do I just not understand this one?)

I sense a number of diagrams, each of which has the 1's and one or more
2's or 3's.  So one could isolate some of the "major stacks", then
include other stuff in "other".

-----Original Message-----
From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:24 AM
To: 'Jean-Jacques Moreau'; Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
Cc: 'Paul Denning'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Web Services specs


I think there's a few interesting pictures that could be done.  I've
proposed this before, but I'll do it again.

Diagram #1: generic diagram of functionality.  I still like the 3 stack
diagram Diagram #2-n: functionality with specification names.  Each
diagram is a particular constellation.  For example, the BEA diagram
shows specs like WS-ReliableMessaging, WS-Security, WS-Transaction*,
BPEL.  The Oracle diagram shows WS-Reliability, WS-Security, WS-CAF,
WS-Chor.

I think there is a potential problem in that it should show the specs
that people "believe" in.  For example, BEA is not an author of
ws-security policy yet we believe in it.  This has the problem of what
defines "believe"?  Does that mean: is a co-author?  Is a "supporter"?
has shipped an implementation?  has announced an implementation?  has
participated in interop testing?  has assigned folks to a committee?

I think there are constellations and they should be diagrammed, but
there is a danger of having lots of small variations that cloud the
picture..

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Jean-Jacques Moreau
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 4:31 PM
> To: Cutler Roger (RogerCutler)
> Cc: Paul Denning; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Web Services specs
>
>
>
> I think it would be a valuable deliverable of this WG to work on a 
> merged list with (some) explaination for each spec, and some amount of
> clustering. This would very concretely paint the WS landscape, in
> addition to your other deliverables.
>
> If this work was to take off, I might be able to contribute some 
> drawings.
>
> Jean-Jacques.
>
> Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) wrote:
>
> > Wow.  That's a huge list.  It indeed has a bunch of things my 
> > annotated list does not, but I think at least some of that
> is because
> > it is drilling down into more detail.  That is, some of these would 
> > probably come under the umbrella of one of my more general entries. 
> > Some others, however, are new to me.  And, I may be wrong, but I 
> > think my list has a few not on this one.
> >
> > I am not volunteering to merge this list and mine.  There are too 
> > many entries on this one that I don't understand ... And besides it 
> > would take more time and effort than I am willing to put
> into this at
> > the moment.
> >
> > It seems to me that the two lists represent, to some extent, 
> > different approaches and might serve different purposes.  Which, if 
> > either, is appropriate output for this WG is unclear to me.  Maybe 
> > neither -- but quite possibly many of us can individually
> derive some
> > benefit from these snapshots anyway.
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: Paul Denning 
> > [mailto:pauld@mitre.org] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 3:06 PM To: 
> > www-ws-arch@w3.org 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.jsp 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-Acknowledge
> ment-0_9.j
> >  sp 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-a
> ttach.html
> >  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-s
> stc-saml-1
> >  .1-pdf-xsd.zip OASIS, Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML), 5 
> > Nov 2002,
> >
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/1383/oasis-s
> stc-saml-1
> >  .0-pdf.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-2
> 00304-wsrp
> >  -specification-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/oas
> is-xacml-1
> >  .0.pdf 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
>  Architecture1.0-BdAD.pdf
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2003 12:41:44 GMT

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