- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 19:09:09 -0500
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Austin, Daniel [mailto:Austin.D@ic.grainger.com] > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 5:59 PM > To: 'David Orchard'; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."] > > > I believe that our charter specifies that XML must be used. [1] Does that mean that we're working on the definition of an "XML Web Service"? Or that we're at the moment working on a definition of a generic "web service", with the caveat that our architecture will only cover "XML Web Services." Cheer up, it gets worse :~) We're going to encounter some semantic dragons if we try to limit web services to "XML", because would have to define "XML", and that's not easy either! Our Charter references the XML activity page, not the 1.0 syntax, and SOAP 1.2 is based on the InfoSet. Likewise, our Charter talks a good bit about URIs and the Web Architecture; is a serialization of a SOAP request in URI syntax "XML?" (The possibility has been discussed on the dist-app and TAG lists, as I recall). Likewise the DOM Abstract Schema spec has an explicit use case for representing RDBMS schema via the DOM interfaces; and I know of various tools that parse a non-XML syntax and generate SAX events, so there's precedent for manipulating non-XML resources with XML interfaces. And HTTP can handle multiple (XML and non-XML) representaitons of the same abstract "resource". If someone requests a non-XML representation of a service resource, are we going to say that it's not REALLY a web service, but it is if they request an XML representation? Sorry, I know I'm being a bit pedantic ... and don't worry, I don't suggest we go down any of these ratholes! I'm just saying that we have our work cut out to define "web service" without getting too picky about exactly what role "XML" must play in the definition. We all know a pure case of a web service when we see one, i.e. a WSDL definition in a UDDI directory used to rigorously define a SOAP message that will invoke a software component that generates an XML result. We also probably agree that an HTML form that that changes frequently that contains instructions for how a human user can enter information and get a result in a loosely-defined format that only human intelligence can make sense out of is *not* a web service. Where exactly in the middle a "web page" definitely becomes a "web service" could be debated endlessly. Rather than trying to draw a hard line, let's accept that there is a large grey area in the middle, warn our readers that it exists, and illustrate our definition with pure cases of web services and not-web-services, and clarify our position on some interesting corner cases, much like those that David Orchard outlined yesterday.
Received on Friday, 22 February 2002 19:10:27 UTC