W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws@w3.org > May 2002

Re: potential users of web services

From: GOUAICH Abdelkader <gouaich@lirmm.fr>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 09:18:59 +0200
Message-ID: <004001c206e1$1a54ab80$106931c1@zfr030080>
To: "Cutler, Roger \(RogerCutler\)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, "'Andrew Layman'" <andrewl@microsoft.com>, <www-ws@w3.org>



Hi all,

I'm not sure that linking a definition with a special technology will be a
good solution, however, I I agree with you that the given definition is
"format" oriented. For instance, a central property that web service, like
software agent, should offer is "autonomy", this dimension is not mentioned!

Kind regards,

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Abdelkader GOUAICH - Ph.D. Student
MOTOROLA Labs , http://www.motorola.com & LIRMM , http://www.lirmm.fr
E-Mail : gouaich@crm.mot.com, gouaich@lirmm.fr
URL: http://www.lirmm.fr/~gouaich

Desk Phone (Montpellier): +33 (0)4 67 41 86 75
Desk Phone (Paris)      : +33 (0)1 69 35 49 25
Mobile Phone            : +33 (0)6.20.88.52.56





----- Original Message -----
From: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
To: "'Andrew Layman'" <andrewl@microsoft.com>; <www-ws@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 3:37 AM
Subject: RE: potential users of web services


> "A Web service is a computational service, accessible via messages of
> definite, programming-language-neutral and platform-neutral format, and
> which has no special presumption that the results of the computation are
> used primarily for display by a user-agent."
>
> Uh, doesn't an abacus fit that definition?
>
> Shouldn't a definition have some description of what something "is" rather
> than what it "is not"?  "... Neutral ... Neutral ...no special presumption
> ... "
>
> Don't you think that it would be nice if a "web service" had something to
do
> with the web?  And, while we're at it, wouldn't it be nice if it had some
> connection to what the major technology vendors, including the one that
pays
> your salary, as well as the people who are using them, call a web service?
> That is, something that works via XML messages, has interfaces with
> standardized descriptions, and so on?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Layman [mailto:andrewl@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:41 PM
> To: www-ws@w3.org
> Subject: RE: potential users of web services
>
>
> Agreed.  We should think about the concept, and think about it in terms of
> what is new and different about the kinds of services that we are
building.
> Rather than looking at the name and trying to _deduce_ what a Web service
> might be, we should look at the actual Web services that we are building
and
> _induce_ the definition that distinguishes them from other nearby
> technologies such as RPC/RMI and Web sites.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Toufic Boubez [mailto:boubez@saffrontech.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 1:06 PM
> To: www-ws@w3.org
> Subject: RE: potential users of web services
>
> I'm sorry I didn't catch this thread from the beginning, having been away
> from my office last week and just catching up on my email! Having sort-of
> "been there at the creation", let me first say that, in my mind, the term
> "Web Services" is a very unfortunate misnomer, since a definition of a
"Web"
> service doesn't really require the Web. It was just a marketing buzzword
> that some people who shall remain nameless came up with at the time. In my
> group at IBM, when we were hammering out the details of UDDI and other Web
> Services components, it was called Service Oriented Architecture, and I'm
> sure Andrew Layman can tell us that it was probably also called something
> else at Microsoft.
>
> Having said that, my view of web services is that it's any platform- and
> implementation-independent software (or even functionality, although you
can
> always wrap functionality such as pizza baking in a software interface!)
> that can be:
>
> * described using an agreed upon or well known description language (for
> example WSDL is nice but not required)
> * published to an agreed upon or well known registry (for example UDDI is
> nice but not required)
> * discovered through an agreed upon or well known mechanism
> * invoked over the network through its declared API
>
> I usually add "composed with other services" but that's somewhat circular!
> Now, you'll see that there's no mention of XML, SOAP, etc. These are
> wonderful and extremely useful standards (the "agreed-upon or well known"
> part) but nothing prevents an internal (within the firewall)
implementation
> consisting of C programs listening on sockets and sending binary data
whose
> format is well-known and described in the organization to be labeled "Web
> Services".
>
> I realise that this view might differ a bit from the "accepted" view,
> considering that the "Web Services Architecture Stack" consists of XML and
> Schema at the bottom of every layered cake, so I might make an exception
for
> XML. But nowhere is it suggested that the other components such as SOAP or
> UDDI are required.
>
> Thoughts??
>
>   --  Toufic
>
> Toufic I. Boubez, Ph.D.
> Chief Technology Officer
> Saffron Technology
> 1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 300
> Morrisville, NC 27560
> boubez@saffrontech.com
>
> 919-468-8201 Voice (x109)
> 919-468-8202 Fax
>
> "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In
practice,
> there is"
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Layman [mailto:andrewl@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:40 PM
> To: www-ws@w3.org
> Subject: RE: potential users of web services
>
>
> Private mail to me suggests, and I agree, that the definition could be
> slightly improved as:
>
> A Web service is a computational service, accessible via messages of
> definite, programming-language-neutral and platform-neutral format, and
> which has no special presumption that the results of the computation are
> used primarily for display by a user-agent.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Layman [mailto:andrewl@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 12:29 PM
> To: Mark Baker
> Cc: www-ws@w3.org
> Subject: RE: potential users of web services
>
> I believe that the services you cite fit my definition of Web service
quoted
> below.  I could perhaps be more concise:
>
> A Web service is a computational service, accessible via messages of
> definite, language-neutral and platform-neutral format, and which has no
> special presumption that the results of the computation are used primarily
> for display on a user-agent.
>
> Hope this works for you.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 12:03 PM
> To: Andrew Layman
> Cc: www-ws@w3.org
> Subject: Re: potential users of web services
>
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 09:10:46AM -0800, Andrew Layman wrote:
> > The term Web service was created to contrast with two earlier
> > technologies.  On the one hand, it identifies a distinction from "Web
> > site" in that a Web site serves pages, typically in HTML, for display
> in
> > a browser to a human, while a "Web service" offers a computation
> > directly to anther computer, with no special expectation that the
> > computation will be used in a browser or for display to a human. Web
> > services are not computer-to-human but computer-to-computer.
>
> Well, if it's the HTML that you're concerned about, why not return some
XML
> or RDF via HTTP GET?  That's machine processable.  And any piece of
software
> can invoke HTTP GET on a URI, no human required.
>
> What about this?  http://www.xmlhack.com/rss10.php
>
> It's an RSS feed for xmlhack.com.  No "getXmlhackRss()", just "GET
> /rss10.php".  It's also not easily human parseable.
>
> I don't know why that's any less a Web service than getStockQuote().
>
> MB
> --
> Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
> http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 03:43:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:40 GMT