WSDL Debate Continued..

Well I too have been following this space not for the entertainment value but
because I think this is clearly an important topic to many in the industry. 
I will echo the comments by Harry H. and Roger C. in that we need to get
back to the task at hand, i.e.  the pertinent technical issues.

I am also a firm believer in the notion of what I will call "architecture by
accretion",... making modest improvements to the current state with new and
emerging technology in a step-wise function.  Admittedly, there is what
Joseph Schumpeter called 'creative destruction' which succinctly put is when
one technology provides wholesale displacement of another (n.b.
transitors/integrated circuits replacing vaccuum tubes). But this kind of
change is rather rare. 

So in terms of adoption, I would argue that a SWS approach based on WSDL is
probably the most likely to succeed in the marketplace. Quite frankly, in
addtiion,  I think there are plenty of instances both within an enterprise
(intranet) and beyond (b2b) where SWS may be a superfluous.  Yet, I think we
all realize there are many potential value points for SWS and associated
ontologies.  

In the meantime, there is plenty of industry work being done in terms of
aligning various WS* standards (one example of many, 
http://www-03.ibm.com/autonomic/wsdm/convergence)  and in step-wise
technology maturation.  Both of these activities may well in time provide a
solid basis for SWS. 


--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/WSDL-Debate-Continued..-t1297787.html#a3455748
Sent from the w3.org - public-sws-ig forum at Nabble.com.

Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 13:30:00 UTC