- From: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 09:49:03 -0500
- To: "David Orchard" <david.orchard@bea.com>, "'Anne Thomas Manes'" <anne@manes.net>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
I can live without "where appropriate". Anne > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of David Orchard > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:22 PM > To: 'Anne Thomas Manes'; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: D-AG0010: Use XML > > > Anne, > > Why do you add the "where appropriate" in the Uses XML goal but not other > goals? Doesn't "where appropriate" apply to all of our goals? > Can you live > with the "where appropriate" not being in the goal? IMHO, part of our job > is to figure out the "where appropriate" applies to each of the goals. > > Cheers, > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > > Behalf Of Anne Thomas Manes > > Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:08 AM > > To: David Orchard; www-ws-arch@w3.org > > Subject: RE: D-AG0010: Use XML > > > > > > Might I suggest: > > > > "uses XML where appropriate." > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org > > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > > > Behalf Of David Orchard > > > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 5:03 PM > > > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > > > Subject: D-AG0010: Use XML > > > > > > > > > This message kicks off discussion on goal 10, use of XML > > (affectionately > > > known as XML world domination ;-). Please comment on goal > > > wording, success > > > factors. > > > > > > The goal as stated > > > "D-AG0010 > > > uses W3C XML technologies in the development of the web services > > > architecture to the extent that this is compatible with the > > overall goals > > > listed here" > > > > > > Discussion: > > > ----------- > > > I think this should be > > > > > > "uses XML.". I can live with "is XML based" > > > > > > 1. The word "technologies" does not add value to the simple > > goal of uses > > > XML. I don't see "uses XML technologies" being better than > > "uses XML". > > > 2. The words "in the development of the web services > > architecture" is > > > redundant. We don't need to put this in every goal. > > > 3. The words "to the extent that this is compatible with > > the overall goals > > > listed here" is redundant. Each and every goal is met wrt > > to other goals. > > > We could use these words with every other goal. > > > > > > 4. What are "XML technologies" or what is "XML"? Is this XML > > > element/attribute, XML Infoset, XML 1.0 + namespaces, XPath 1.0 > > > data model, > > > any work that has an XML Schema? This is undefined. I > > think we should > > > leave it as such, or we should ask another group. Perhaps > > the XML CG, the > > > XML Core WG, or the TAG may have a definition for what > > "XML", "XML Based", > > > "XML Technologies" means. > > > > > > Other issues: > > > ------------- > > > 5. Is this redundant with D-AG0009: alignment with Web architecture? > > > Certainly the web architecture has tendencies that a goal is for > > > all formats > > > to be XML based. > > > 6. Should we separate the outputs of the Working Group (the > > reference > > > architecture document) from the implementations of web > > services? Sample > > > wording might be "uses XML for Web Services vocabularies". > > > > > > To forestall a rathole, it is inappropriate to talk about > > under what cases > > > this goal cannot be met. The goal should not say anything > > like "uses XML > > > element/attribute syntax except where humans are authoring > > the documents" > > > (ala Xquery) or "uses XML except for performance reasons" > > (the binary > > > attachments/compression argument). > > > > > > Critical success factors > > > ------------------------ > > > Each new architectural area is representable in a syntactic > > > schema language > > > like XML Schema. I stress the "syntactic" adjective to > > schema language > > > because the TAG has occasionally ratholed into HTML and RDF > > > documents being > > > "schema" languages. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dave > > > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 09:49:03 UTC