W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > January 2004

RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:13:41 -0800
Message-ID: <EDDE2977F3D216428E903370E3EBDDC9039588C1@MAIL01.stc.com>
To: "He, Hao" <Hao.He@thomson.com.au>, "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

I personally would be happy if they moved in the SOA direction. But, as you say, changing frame of mind can take time.

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au]
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 3:11 PM
> To: 'Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)'; Ugo Corda; Champion, Mike;
> www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> 
> 
> I think grid computing can also benefit significantly if they 
> take a more
> SOA approach. 
> 
> My personal observation is that the research community is 
> relatively slow on
> adopting new IT concepts for good or bad. I was still doing Fortran
> programming not long ago.
> 
> Hao
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
> [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 9:49 AM
> To: Ugo Corda; He, Hao; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> 
> 
> I stand properly corrected and slightly abashed.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] 
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 4:37 PM
> To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); He, Hao; Champion, Mike;
> www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> 
> 
> Sure it does. Many recent WSDL 2.0 discussions were actually 
> prompted by
> grid community requirements (just search the WSDL archive for "grid").
> 
> Ugo
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 2:27 PM
> > To: He, Hao; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Well, since Hao agrees with me, let me question the 
> relevance of the 
> > grid computing example.  Does grid computing really use 
> WSDL and SOAP?
> 
> > If not, it is out of scope.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au]
> > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 3:32 PM
> > To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> > 
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > I think Roger has summarised very well.  We are not
> > prescribing.  We are
> > just telling people the consequences if they want to things in a way
> > that is not intended, which can be totally ok under certain
> > circumstance, for example, legacy integration.
> > 
> > Hao
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> > [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 3:13 AM
> > To: He, Hao; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > A lot of people, myself included, think that trying to do 
> "distributed
> 
> > objects" using Web services is a big mistake.  I seem to 
> recall people
> 
> > saying that one of the goals of an architecture is to limit 
> > alternatives, or something like that.  Surely a reasonable 
> thing for 
> > an architecture to articulate would be something like, "You 
> can try to
> > implement objects in an SOA if you want, but that's not what 
> > it's for".
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On
> > Behalf Of He, Hao
> > Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2004 10:26 PM
> > To: 'Champion, Mike'; 'www-ws-arch@w3.org '
> > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> > 
> > 
> > hi, Mike,
> > 
> > It appears to me that most people have, at least, agreed with the
> > following:
> > 
> > 1. The architectural goal of SOA (and WS in general) is to "achieve 
> > loose-coupling between interacting software agents in order to 
> > preserve the benefits of reusability, extensibility and simplicity."
> > 
> > 2. Two main architectural constraints of SOA: 1) A small 
> set of simple
> 
> > and ubiquitous interfaces to all participating software agents. 2) 
> > Descriptive messages delivered through the interfaces.
> > 
> > I, personally, would also add extensibility as part of the 
> constraints
> 
> > but Dave O would argue it is just a best practise (however, he 
> > believes that extensibility is important and has written a number of
> > articles on
> > it). 
> > 
> > As to the relationships among the terms  "distributed
> > system", "service
> > oriented architecture," and  "web service", I believe there 
> > are just two
> > main kinds, those based on OO and those based on SOA. The confusion
> > comes when one tries to do "distributed objects" using Web 
> services. 
> > 
> > Hao
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 8:26 AM
> > To: 'www-ws-arch@w3.org '
> > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au]
> > > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 4:20 PM
> > > To: 'Champion, Mike '; 'www-ws-arch@w3.org '
> > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6
> > 
> > > I still think we need to define/explain SOA by formally 
> listing the
> > > architectural constraints.  You sort of did it but I am 
> strongly in 
> > > favor of explicitly listing them as constraints.
> > 
> > That's what the previous draft tried to do.  I struggled with that 
> > because I'm not at all sure how many of the SOA principles are core 
> > definitions, which are really architectural constraints, 
> and which are
> 
> > best practices for developing *good* SOAs (e.g. coarse 
> granularity). 
> > What would you suggest as the list of constraints?
> > 
> > > Can we also replace "There is considerable confusion in the
> > computing
> > > industry about the relationships among the terms
> > "distributed system",
> > 
> > > "service oriented architecture," and "web service", as well as to
> > > related technologies such as ..." with something more positive?
> > 
> > OK, propose something! I don't have a problem with changing 
> it, but I 
> > think there *is* immense confusion about this stuff.
> > 
> > > 
> > > BTW, I predicted in my article
> > > (http://webservices.xml.com/pub/a/ws/2003/09/30/soa.html)
> > > that someone would soon replace the original meaning of SOAP with 
> > > Service Oriented Architecture Protocol. Now, you did it. :)
> > 
> > I was trying to remember who I stole that from!  I should 
> have cited 
> > your article too, because I remember reading it and getting 
> a lot out 
> > of it a few months ago.  I remember thinking about stealing your
> > CD-playing
> > service example when I first started wrestling with this 
> action item,
> > but decided that it was too informal for this document.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 12 January 2004 18:13:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:24 GMT