- From: Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:15:57 +0200
- To: "Smith, Kevin, VF-Group" <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com>, "Phil Archer" <parcher@icra.org>
- Cc: "SWD WG" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, <public-powderwg@w3.org>
Kevin, Phil, Let me first thank you for your answers. I should have been more precisely: I was actually looking for a _vocabulary_ rather than a concrete solution regarding a certain layer/technology ;) But anyway, thanks, again - I'll keep looking around ... Cheers, Michael ---------------------------------------------------------- Michael Hausenblas, MSc. Institute of Information Systems & Information Management JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Steyrergasse 17, A-8010 Graz, AUSTRIA ---------------------------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: Smith, Kevin, VF-Group [mailto:Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com] > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:47 PM > To: Phil Archer; Hausenblas, Michael > Cc: SWD WG; public-powderwg@w3.org > Subject: RE: Question regarding the availability of services > (and resources) > > SOAP-POWDER? That will never wash... > > Hi Michael - I would have thought the use case below was more > efficiently dealt with in either the transport layer (load balancer > configurations) or in front-end application logic (e.g. HTTP > proxy/Access layer/Application container) than with a POWDER DR. > > Cheers > Kevin > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-powderwg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-powderwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Phil Archer > Sent: 20 July 2007 11:32 > To: Hausenblas, Michael > Cc: SWD WG; public-powderwg@w3.org > Subject: Re: Question regarding the availability of services (and > resources) > > > Michael, > > I may have misunderstood but I'm not sure that POWDER is the > best helper > > here. We deal with generalised metadata that can be applied > to lots of things at once rather than the sort of use case > you describe. > > That said, I can see that we're going to face the same issue > before long. Some of us are working on a project that will > see a service that will handle Description Resources and talk > to its clients over SOAP (the > > inevitable SOAP-POWDER made manifest...) but if our service > is slow, clients will want to talk to a mirror or some other > service. Hmmm... > maybe this is a job for the Rule Interchange Format folk > (http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/)? > > Phil. > > Hausenblas, Michael wrote: > > > > All, > > > > I've got a (maybe dumb) question regarding the availability of > > services (and resources), or better say how to describe and handle > this. > > This may as well concern the 'Best Practice Recipes for > Publishing RDF > > Vocabularies' deliverable [1], but might also touch POWDER-WG [2] > issues > > - > > I'm unsure about it ... > > > > > > Now, here comes our problem. When developing SW applications, we > > frequently encounter the following situation: Say, there are two > > external > services > > A and B. > > In our SW application I'd like to state that per default service A > > should be used, but in case A is not available (or has too big > > latency), service B > must > > be used. > > > > What I've gathered so far (but I must admit, I did not read > each and > > every post in all the mailing lists ;) is that: > > > > + The 'POWDER: Use Cases and Requirements' document [3] also tackles > > this issues, IMHO, but I can't find a hook for our problem; > > > > + The Web Services Policy Working Group [4] has published a policy > > model in its 'Web Services Policy 1.5 - Framework' [5]; > though AFAIK > > this is not based on RDF, and I don't know if REST-interfaces are > > addressed > > equally. > > > > So, I guess the question would be: Is there a common (RDF-based) > > vocabulary (along with some standardised rules) available > that would > > allow us to handle the above described setup on a generic, > declarative > > level? > > > > Any thoughts & pointers welcome! > > > > Cheers, > > Michael > > > > BTW: Please note that - in my understanding - the same might > > be applicable for resources (or repositories), and equally > > one could extend it regarding QoS issues. > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-swbp-vocab-pub-20060314/ > > [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/ > > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/NOTE-powder-use-cases-20070525/ > > [4] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/policy/ > > [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/PR-ws-policy-20070706/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Michael Hausenblas, MSc. > > Institute of Information Systems & Information Management > JOANNEUM > > RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Steyrergasse 17, A-8010 Graz, > > AUSTRIA > > > > <office> > > phone: +43-316-876-1193 (fax:-1191) > > e-mail: michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at > > web: http://www.joanneum.at/iis/ > > > > <private> > > mobile: +43-660-7621761 > > web: http://www.sw-app.org/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >
Received on Friday, 20 July 2007 20:17:22 UTC