- From: James M Snell <jasnell@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:20:32 -0700
- To: "Joseph Hui" <jhui@digisle.net>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
I've just been monitoring this conversation as much as possible, but I'd like to just throw this comment out there. A Web Service must be defined as having the properties that it can be decribed and discovered. Both the Web service and it's description must be discoverable. Here we have two requirements and part of a definition. Requirement 1 ==> A Web service must be describable and discoverable Requirement 2 ==> A Web service description must be discoverable Definition ==> A Web service can be described and discovered. - James M Snell/Fresno/IBM Web services architecture and strategy Internet Emerging Technologies, IBM 544.9035 TIE line 559.587.1233 Office 919.486.0077 Voice Mail jasnell@us.ibm.com Programming Web Services With SOAP, O'reilly & Associates, ISBN 0596000952 == Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go. - Joshua 1:9 Sent by: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org> cc: Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."] By now IMHO we the WG have made the progress that D&D ought to be in the def. (Have we not? I don't want to be presumptuous here.) So the issue to be settled is whether D&D is already accounted for in URI. In my view URI is for addressability. A globally unique ID offers no intrinsic value to a resource's discovery. E.g. there's no way johny, seeking to buy books, can discover a book seller by inferring from a URI like http://www.amazon.com. Mark's made some good points; yet I find the "D&D-accounted-for-in-URI" argument too tenuous. Withi the web context, D&D is an integral (as Sandeep put it) part of WS. It's not a property that can be assumed by default, thus calling it out is warranted. Cheers, Joe Hui Exodus, a Cable & Wireless service ========================================= > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:53 AM > To: Sandeep Kumar > Cc: Vinoski Stephen; Joseph Hui; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."] > > > Sandeep, > > > If D&D are not an integral part of a Web Service defintion, > > I was claiming that discoverability *is* an integral part of the > definition. It's just already accounted for by defining that a Web > service be URI identifiable. > > I know this is a bit different than some Web service work people have > already done, but this is (IMO) one of those times where our > mandate to > be integrated with Web architecture effects our work. > > > pl help me define > > how would you define a Web (or a Network) of Web Services, > the participants. > > > > At a high-level, they must at least have the same > characteristics. If not, > > it would be much harder to reason about them semantically, deal with > > managing & monitoring them. > > Sorry, I'm unclear what you're asking. > > MB > -- > Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. > Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com > http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com >
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 13:21:31 UTC