Re: D-AC009.2 discussion points and proposal(s)

Well said.

Web services folks can't have it both ways.  If it is part of the Web,
then the Semantic Web must be accomodated.  If it isn't part of the
Web, then the Semantic Web can be ignored - but in that case, what
the heck are Web services doing in the W3C?

MB

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 04:47:33PM -0400, David Booth wrote:
> (Just so that this message is not misunderstood, I am not objecting to 
> Chris's currently proposed wording for D-AC009.2, because I believe the 
> issue is more relevant to the resulting Working Groups and technologies 
> than the Architecture WG itself.  However I do want to point out one thing 
> for the benefit of future decisions . . .  )
> 
> At 02:00 PM 5/21/2002 -0400, Champion, Mike wrote:
> >the WS requirements should be
> >driving the SW requirements rather than vice versa.
> 
> I think it would be very dangerous to reverse the requirement like 
> that.  Web Services is important, but it isn't more important than the Web 
> as a whole.  The Semantic Web is just the incremental advancement of the 
> Web as a whole to be more useful.  (Specifically, to enable you to find, 
> share and combine information much more easily.)  It isn't a separate Web 
> application.
> 
> Web Services needs to work with the Web -- not the other way around.  If we 
> were to turn the requirement around, then we would risk Web Services 
> fracturing or inhibiting the Web as a whole, which would be very bad indeed.
> 
> 
> -- 
> David Booth
> W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> Telephone: +1.617.253.1273

-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               distobj@acm.org
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com

Received on Thursday, 23 May 2002 21:14:57 UTC