RE: granularity/definition of a "service"

Quoting "Huhns, Michael" <huhns@engr.sc.edu>:

> A "service" that only receives is equivalent to a write-only memory.  I
> have never found that to be a useful service and would like to hear
> about the situation you are imagining where it would be a coherent
> stand-alone functionality.

/dev/null on Unix systems is often used as a sink to throw output
away.

Also, something might be receive-only as a service (ie, so far as
it's description in OWL-S or whatever as a service was concerned)
but nonetheless allow the data to be accessed in some other way.
(Perhaps something that projected pictures on a screen would be
an example.)

-- Jeff