- From: Brian Connell <brian@westglobal.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 14:48:12 +0100
- To: "Geoff Arnold" <Geoff.Arnold@Sun.COM>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Hi, > Definition: A Web service is a software application identified by a Don't mean to be totally pedantic, but I believe we should replace the term 'software application' with something different. A Web Service can be a sub-part of a 'software application', not necessarily the entire thing. Interesting question ... does a Web Service only become a Web Service because it can be defined and described using Web Services standards? If this suffices as a definition, then the definition should only revolve around the standard protocols. So we should either define Web Services as a *means* of: defining interfaces and bindings discovering existing definitions interacting and communicating with said interfaces. Or should we also be trying to define characteristics of the service itself (loosely-coupled, business-oriented)? Is this not a very important (and different) part of a definition for Web Services? Or is it both? In which case, where are the definitions for 'loosely-coupled' and 'business-oriented'? Can a software service be a Web Service if it isn't business-oriented or loosely-coupled? Obviously, a software service that doesn't adhere to the Web Services standards is *not* a Web Service, but is may still be loosely-coupled, etc. So, should we go the whole hog, and define Web Services in terms of the characteristics of a service too (loosely-coupled, etc) Maybe one definition is too ambitious for all of this .. maybe there should be more than one definition. Brian Connell CTO, WestGlobal
Received on Monday, 12 August 2002 09:51:15 UTC