RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]

+1

At 04:14 AM 3/3/02, Vinoski, Stephen wrote:
>Note that the definition does not deny direct human involvement. It
>states only that direct human involvement is not required, which is not
>the same as saying that it's not allowed.
>
>--steve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 12:08 AM
> > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >       Two amendments :
> >
> >       1.      What does the "through an application
> > programming interface capable of
> > being described," buy us ? Why not just "capable of being described by
> > standard formats" ?
> >
> >       2.      Why specifically deny direct human involvement
> > ? Do we care who (or
> > what) interacts so long as the interactions are
> > internet-based protocols ?
> >
> >       IMHO,
> >       "A web service is a software application or component
> > identified by a URI,
> > whose interfaces and binding are capable of being described
> > by standard
> > formats and supports direct interactions with other software
> > applications or
> > components via internet-based protocols".
> >
> >       As Heather says, OK, everyone can open fire now. :-)
> >
> > cheers & have a nice weekend
> >
> >  | -----Original Message-----
> >  | From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> >  | Behalf Of Vinoski, Stephen
> >  | Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 5:08 PM
> >  | To: James M Snell
> >  | Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> >  | Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]
> >  |
> >  |
> >  | OK, James, if we take your inputs along with those of
> > Heather, Mark, and
> >  | others, and apply them to my original strawman definition including
> >  | Mark's amendment, we get:
> >  |
> >  | "A web service is a software application or component
> > identified by a
> >  | URI that, through an application programming interface
> > capable of being
> >  | described, supports direct interactions with other
> > software applications
> >  | or components via internet-based protocols, where said
> > interactions do
> >  | not require direct human involvement."
> >  |
> >  | Are we there? :-)
> >  |
> >  | --steve
> >  |
> >  |
> >  | > -----Original Message-----
> >  | > From: James M Snell [mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com]
> >  | > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:21 PM
> >  | > To: Vinoski, Stephen
> >  | > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> >  | > Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]
> >  | >
> >  | >
> >  | > Stephen,
> >  | >
> >  | > We actually are on the same page here.  We both seem to agree
> >  | > that yes,
> >  | > Web services can be described and discovered, but we disagree
> >  | > whether or
> >  | > not those properties need to be called out explicitly in the
> >  | > definition.
> >  | > You seem to be saying no, I'm saying yes they do.  The reason
> >  | > is the same
> >  | > as why we explicitly define Web resources as having unique URI
> >  | > identifiers.  Of course Web resources have identifiers,
> >  | > they're objects
> >  | > and all objects have identifiers -- of what use is it to
> >  | > explicitly call
> >  | > out that point?  The answer is that by stating the fact,
> > we lay the
> >  | > groundwork for standardizing how those identifiers are created,
> >  | > represented, communicated, etc.  We're basically stating that Web
> >  | > resources need to have a standardized method of
> >  | > identification.  For Web
> >  | > Services, explicitly calling out description and discovery as
> >  | > properties
> >  | > of a Web service indicate that there needs to be standardized
> >  | > mechanisms
> >  | > for description and discovery -- regardless of whether or not
> >  | > every Web
> >  | > service actually implements those standards.  Because a Web
> >  | > Service can be
> >  | > described and discovered, the overall Web Services
> >  | > Architecture needs to
> >  | > take into account standardized mechanisms for description and
> >  | > discovery.
> >  | > I'm not saying we have to create such standards here, just
> >  | > acknowledge
> >  | > their existence and role.  Make sense?
> >  | >
> >  | > - 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
> >  | >
> >  | > To:     James M Snell/Fresno/IBM@IBMUS
> >  | > cc:
> >  | > Subject:        RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some
> > Thoughts ..."]
> >  | >
> >  | >
> >  | >
> >  | > Given that you won't be able to prove it, let's look at it in a
> >  | > practical manner. Everything in the universe is both
> > describable and
> >  | > discoverable. Therefore, speaking about D&D generally
> > does not add any
> >  | > clarity to the definition. On the other hand, if you're speaking
> >  | > specifically about discovery services like UDDI and
> >  | > description services
> >  | > like WSDL, then that too is wrong, as I know of several
> > web services
> >  | > already in production that use neither WSDL nor anything
> > like UDDI.
> >  | >
> >  | > --steve
> >  | >
> >  | > > -----Original Message-----
> >  | > > From: James M Snell [mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com]
> >  | > > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 3:57 PM
> >  | > > To: Vinoski, Stephen
> >  | > > Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]
> >  | > >
> >  | > >
> >  | > > 100% of all Web resources, including Web Services CAN be
> >  | > > described and
> >  | > > discovered.  The differentiating factor is HOW.  Every Web
> >  | > > service CAN be
> >  | > > discovered regardless of whether or not the Web
> > service explicitly
> >  | > > supports a specific discovery mechanism.  Every Web
> > service CAN be
> >  | > > decribed regardless of whether or not the Web service
> >  | > > explicity supports a
> >  | > > specific description mechanism.  You are right in that
> >  | > decription and
> >  | > > discovery alone do not distinguish Web services from other
> >  | > > types of web
> >  | > > resources, but that does not mean that the properties of
> >  | > > discoverability
> >  | > > and description are not part of the formal definition of a
> >  | > > Web service.
> >  | > >
> >  | > > - 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
> >  | > >
> >  | > > To:     James M Snell/Fresno/IBM@IBMUS, "Joseph Hui"
> >  | > > <jhui@digisle.net>
> >  | > > cc:     <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> >  | > > Subject:        RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some
> > Thoughts ..."]
> >  | > >
> >  | > >
> >  | > >
> >  | > > > -----Original Message-----
> >  | > > > From: James M Snell [mailto:jasnell@us.ibm.com]
> >  | > > > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 1:21 PM
> >  | > > > To: Joseph Hui
> >  | > > > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> >  | > > > Subject: RE: Web Service Definition [Was "Some Thoughts ..."]
> >  | > > >
> >  | > > >
> >  | > > > 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.
> >  | > >
> >  | > > No, and no. This thread of email already contain multiple
> >  | > explanations
> >  | > > of why.
> >  | > >
> >  | > > > Definition ==> A Web service can be described and discovered.
> >  | > >
> >  | > > As I've already explained using real-world examples, neither
> >  | > > of these is
> >  | > > necessarily true (other than the discovery via URI that Mark
> >  | > > mentioned).
> >  | > >
> >  | > > Neither discovery (as in UDDI-like services) nor description
> >  | > > distinguish
> >  | > > Web Services from prior art, nor are they found in 100% of
> >  | > > existing Web
> >  | > > Services systems. They are therefore not needed to define Web
> >  | > > Services.
> >  | > >
> >  | > > --steve
> >  | > >
> >  | > > >
> >  | > > > - 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
> >  | > > > >
> >  | > > >
> >  | > > >
> >  | > > >
> >  | > > >
> >  | > >
> >  | > >
> >  | > >
> >  | >
> >  | >
> >  | >
> >  |
> >  |
> >
> >

--
Jeff Mischkinsky                    jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com
Consulting Member Technical Staff   +1(650)506-1975 (voice)
Oracle Corporation                  +1(650)506-7225 (fax)
400 Oracle Parkway, M/S 4OP960
Redwood Shores, CA 94065 USA

Received on Monday, 4 March 2002 12:11:57 UTC