Arch doc comments; SOAP and WSDL as protocols

I've just read through the latest draft of our architecture document at;

I really like where it's headed, including the prose, and the structure
as I understand it.

A big concern I have is that we're putting a lot of text in there that
should arguably go in later.  By that I mean that I'd still like to see
us get something lean-and-mean out ASAP, based on SOAP + WSDL.  IMO,
every additional sentence in there that isn't directly contributing to
this, stands the chance of slowing us down as we refine and rephrase it
to meet people's liking.  If we plan to publish without concensus on
that stuff, then I'm not as concerned.

At this point in time, I'll just list the more substantial comments that
I had;

- section 1.3 says "A small and non-exclusive set of protocols for
interchanging information between agents", which I believe is incorrect,
because each WSDL document defines a new protocol.  So perhaps more
accurately we should say that the Web services architecture (currently)
consists of a protocol framework which provides a means for each
application to define its own protocol.

- I agree with Chris' note that SOAP belongs in the protocol section,
since it's principle value is as a protocol, despite it also having
some of the properties of a format.

- for the reason suggested in the first point above, I would also put
WSDL in the protocols section.



Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.     

Received on Thursday, 29 August 2002 23:39:25 UTC