TAG directions

My feelings about the TAG general direction are

1. The basic modus operandi of issues, findings and architecture 
document have worked well.

2. We have covered the basic web architecture ground, and work is 
needed in other connected areas such as WS and SW.

3. we have HTTPRange-14 to do which connects to Sem Web stuff.  Henry 
has pointed out that we really have a duty to resolve that. The SWBP WG 
has asked us to in no uncertain terms.

4. The WSArch WG tried WS arch once and found it hard. Web Service is 
driven by a few  member companies, it is not obvious whom to ask for a 
general Architectural model, or that one exists. It seems to evolve 
bottom-up, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

-- The Semantic Web work, though being more formal, does have a lot of 
architectural work.  This foundation of RDF and OWL can be pointed to 
by the TAG. However, the connection of the existing web architecture to 
the semantic web architecture. Also, there is some philosophy of the 
meaning of documents which I think could be provided.

I propose that we spend time on HTTPRange-14, and either in the process 
of that or following from that we build an architecture document 
extension which includes semantic web foundations and principles.


Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 17:53:03 UTC