W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-state@w3.org > June 2003

RE: Some requirements

From: Krishna Sankar <ksankar@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:59:56 -0700
To: "'Savas Parastatidis'" <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>, "'Steve Graham'" <sggraham@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "'David Snelling'" <d.snelling@fle.fujitsu.com>, "'Jim Webber'" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "'Paul Watson'" <Paul.Watson@newcastle.ac.uk>, <public-ws-desc-state@w3c.org>, <public-ws-desc-state-request@w3.org>, "'Steve Tuecke'" <tuecke@mcs.anl.gov>
Message-ID: <001001c331de$05f970c0$f60c47ab@amer.cisco.com>

Hi all,
> If adoption of a set of common operations that operate on attributes
> would be useful, then I can see another WS-* spec.
	This is that specification ! If we define the serviceData
concept here and expect another specification to explain the operations
on them, it will just add the proliferation of more WS-* specifications.
We already have too many :o(. Our goal should *not* be to develop max
number of specifications, but a few cohesive and coherent

	Point well taken on the independence from underlying
implementations - may they be languages, OS platforms and such. But, we
still need to define the interfaces of the common operations. The
platforms and languages are free to implement them as they wish,
leveraging their own idiosyncrasies.

	IMHO, as we are into the realm of stateful services (with state
visibility thru the sericeData mechanism), we should *completely* define
what that means. In this regard we need to touch upon security as well -
I am thinking of visibility and access control of the
serviceDataelements - how they can be expresses, exchanged, queried,....

	IMHO, it would be better if we address the security interfaces
in this specification, leaving, of course, the implementations to choose
whatever mechanisms. I differentiate between mechanics and mechanisms -
we define the mechanics, the platforms do the mechanisms. In that sense,
these security aspects are NOT orthogonal to the serviceData mechanics.

	I think the OGSA/OGSI is too silent on security. I might be in
the minority on this (hopefully not a minority of 1, especially on this
Friday the 13th :o))

	Cheers & have a nice weekend
Received on Friday, 13 June 2003 15:00:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:32:54 UTC