W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > November 2004

RE: Proposed definition of node

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:33:29 -0800
Message-ID: <48BD8D0502C820438ECA5E27DC7AC9530134DE23@MAIL05.stc.com>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

As far as I remember, there was a recent vote where it was decided not
to refer to the agent concept in the particular context that the vote
related to. 

I am not aware of any previous decision of avoiding any future reference
to the agent concept, or of avoiding any reference to the WSA document.
(If I missed such a decision, please point it out to me).

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 3:57 PM
> To: Ugo Corda; David Booth; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed definition of node
> 
> 
> Um, been there, done that .. pls see the mailing list 
> archives. We've discussed this topic enough times!
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ugo Corda" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
> To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; "David 
> Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 11:53 PM
> Subject: RE: Proposed definition of node
> 
> 
> >
> > I don't see what is the problem in leveraging definitions 
> produced by 
> > the Web Services Architecture WG.
> >
> > My company, like many others, put a lot of efforts in that 
> work, and 
> > IBM itself was a member of the WG at the time that work was 
> finalized.
> >
> > I know that the WSA document is a WG Note and not a 
> Recommendation - 
> > but that does not change the basic observation that a lot of W3C 
> > members' work went into that spec and it does not seem fair 
> to act as 
> > if all that work did not occur.
> >
> > Ugo
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] 
> > > On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 8:00 PM
> > > To: David Booth; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > > Cc: Anish Karmarkar
> > > Subject: Re: Proposed definition of node
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ugh. -1 .. :-(.
> > >
> > > I don't like the re-introduction of "agent" .. we took 
> this up and 
> > > dealt with it once before.
> > >
> > > We already use terms "service client" and "service provider". How 
> > > about something like this: A node is a single service client or a 
> > > single service provider, where a single client or service may use 
> > > one of more network endpoints (HTTP URLs, host/ports, JMS queues
> > > etc.) to communicate.
> > >
> > > Sanjiva.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>
> > > To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> > > Cc: "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 11:07 PM
> > > Subject: Proposed definition of node
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Per the action item that Anish and I took at the F2F, here is a 
> > > > proposed definition of node that we suggest: [[ A node is an 
> > > > agent[1] that can transmit and/or receive message(s) 
> described in 
> > > > WSDL description(s) and process them. A node may be 
> accessible via 
> > > > more than one physical address or transport. ]]
> > > >
> > > > Reference
> > > > 1. Agent: http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-arch/#agent
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > David Booth
> > > > W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 15:34:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT