- From: Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:13:12 -0500
- To: "Katia Sycara" <katia@cs.cmu.edu>, "Doug Bunting" <db134722@iPlanet.com>, "Public W/S Arch" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
- Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Message-ID: <E7AC4500EAB7A442ABA7521D18814397028D188A@tor-msg-01.northamerica.corp.microsoft>
> However, I have a question: why do we need to explicilty mention the Technical Architecture Group? I suggest you read the W3C TAG charter [1] to understand the central role that the TAG has in defining the Web architecture. I also suggest you review the earlier emails in this thread [2-3] that proposed the addition of an explicit reference to the TAG. >? Is this a group within W3C or outside? The W3C TAG was created by the W3C membership last year and the first appointees and elected members were announced in Dec. You can track the work of the TAG at [4] and on its archived public email list [5]. > In either case, why explicitly mention it? Simply because the TAG owns the responsibility for overall architecture work at the W3C. /paulc Chairman, XML Query WG W3C Techncial Architecture Group Member [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/07/19-tag [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0153.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0155.html [4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/ Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 < <mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com> mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com> -----Original Message----- From: Katia Sycara [mailto:katia@cs.cmu.edu] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:23 AM To: Doug Bunting; Public W/S Arch Subject: RE: Updated status of D-AG0014, coordination / liaison outside W3C Doug, I agree that D-AG0014 can be removed and replaced by the extended D-AG0013 you proposed. However, I have a question: why do we need to expliclty mention the Technical Architecture Group? Is this a group within W3C or outside? In either case, why explicitly mention it? Thanks, Katia -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Doug Bunting Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 6:11 PM To: Public W/S Arch Subject: Updated status of D-AG0014, coordination / liaison outside W3C All, We've had a bit of discussion on this goal since my previous Status email [1]. Unfortunately, even the small group of Hugo [2], Daniel [3] and I [4] hasn't reached agreement. (Or, maybe I'm just unconvinced.) Hugo has chosen to put the debate aside until decided when describing the status of D-AG0013, coordination within W3C [5]. In [4], I asked the following questions: 1. whether "liaise" is in scope, 2. whether working with outside groups is sufficiently distinct from working with W3C for its own WSAWG goal, and 3. whether such work is distinct from recognizing available technologies from outside groups for its own WSAWG goal. 4. whether "other groups doing Web services related work" in the current text for D-AG0013 should be clarified to specifically encompass those groups not part of the W3C. The text I was referring to in 4. was D-AG0013 "co-ordinate with other W3C Working Groups, the Technical Architecture Group and other groups doing Web services related work in order to maintain a coherent architecture for Web services." Note: I've updated this to include David's point about the singularity of the TAG [6]. If 3. (recognizing outside technologies) is part of goal D-AG0003 or D-AG0011 or one of the others, this would be another reason to remove D-AG0014. As it is, we definitely need more input on this goal and it is not clear we're ready for critical success factors (even if I knew how to measure or liaison ability). The current text remains D-AG0014 "serve as liaison with groups outside W3C who are working on web services in order to achive interoperability and reduce duplication of effort" I believe this goal should be removed and handled through the extension to D-AG0013 previously discussed and captured above. While "liaise" and "coordinate" are somewhat different terms, the goal is the same. Our ability to meet any external liaison goals may be less than our ability to perform coordination internal to W3C but this doesn't change our aims. If the group wishes to maintain this as a separate goal from D-AG0013, I might suggest a parallel goal structure: D-AG0013 "co-ordinate with groups outside W3C doing Web services related work in order to maintain a coherent architecture for Web services." thanx, doug [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0206.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0263.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0218.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0227.html [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0376.html [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Mar/0274.html
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2002 11:13:45 UTC