W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > October 2002

Re: Words for the Triangles

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:45:51 -0400
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF6779BBD8.5F2A47DD-ON85256C45.0001B00B-85256C45.005BF9CE@rchland.ibm.com>

While I appreciate the sentiment of your comments, I feel compelled to 
disagree that we can just label the top role "The Web" and be done with 

To put a cosmology spin on the issue, there's an awful lot of "dark 
that comprises the Web that is effectively "invisible". By this I refer to
the beellions (well, maybe not, but Carl Sagan would be proud:-) of orphan 

Web resources that are not linked from any other resource
and which are not the default Web page for a given origin server
such that they might be discovered by a Web 'bot on a 5 year mission to 
seek out
new Web resources; to boldly go where no 'bot has gone before. Even
Google does not know of their identity, yet they exist none the less and 
be quite unaware that they are the equivalent of cosmological "dark 

There is more to making a Web resource discoverable via the Web than
simply making the resource available via the Web. Whether the
"registry" is merely a site map, the default Web page for an
origin server containing links to other resources which contain
links..., or a UDDI or ebXML registry, there needs to be some
action taken that makes a given resource discoverable via the Web.

The action can be implicit or explicit, but it MUST be recognized in the
architecture. I believe this action to be the act of registering with, or 
publishing to ,
a "registry", even if that "registry" is merely a collection of links off 
default page of an origin server.

Further more, a Web service may have good reason to engage with a
particular class or instance of a discovery agency:
        - make my presence known only within my enterprise
        - make my presence known external to my enterprise
        - limit awareness of my presence to the secret society of foobar

I am also happy with "discovery agencies" if "registry" is too overloaded 
a term.


Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624

David Booth wrote on 09/30/2002 07:26:44 PM:

> Heather Kreger <kreger@us.ibm.com> on Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:54:16 -0400 
> >No, you do not discover from the web. Google discovers from the Web. 
> >he records it in his registry. THEN you discover from Google,  which is
> >searching his - gasp - registry. So, you are discovering from a 
> >. . .
> Well, yes, that is a legitimate one way to look at it, but I certainly 
> not think of it that way.
> To me, Google and other tools are simply my MEANS of discovery -- not 
> desired end point of my discovery.  Google, Yahoo, email, and postcards 
> billboards with URIs on them are all means that I use to find what's on 
> Web.  Google just helps me to find it by suggesting a URL, but I get the 

> information that I seek from the Web -- I don't get it from Google.  All 
> get from Google are suggestions for where I should look.
> To me, the top cloud in the triangle diagram is simply the Web -- that 
> universal space where you can put information and get information.  And 
> UDDI registry is certainly a part of that space.  A Web Service 
> its information (somehow), and a Client finds that information 
> (somehow).  But they don't have to use a common "registry" to do so 
> you wish to call the entire Web a "registry", but I think that would be 
> rather disingenuous).  The only thing they have to have in common is the 

> Web: One places the information on the Web and the other finds it.
> -- 
> David Booth
> W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2002 12:46:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:05:41 UTC