RE: Definition of Choreography

> If you-all adopt one of Paul Prescod's other principles,
> that all important elements be made into Web resources,
> then the distinction between public and private is pretty clear:
> * public is a Web resource with a URI
> * private is anything else.

Bob,

We used to make a distinction between protocols that are public (e.g.
RosettaNet, ebXML) and protocls that are private (e.g. IIOP, DCOM). The
reality for our customers is that Web services are used everywhere, in
between trading partners, as well as for back-end applications.

The distinction between what is public and what is private has transitioned
from a matter of protocol to a matter of semantics. Within a particular
scope, some services are private, others are public.

Inside the firewall I will tend to make all my services available, hence
'public' in that scope.

Outside the firewall I will be more judgemental and offer only those
services that offer business value to my customers and can be safely exposed
to the outside world. In that scope there would be less 'public' services,
all other services are 'private' in that scope, even though I am talking
about the same set of services.

I may also establish barriers between my departments, such that not all the
services used within one department are made 'public' to other departments.

I would much prefer to see the business user in control, deciding which
scopes exist within a given organization, and which services are made public
in any given scope. In effect, we are returning to the virtual distinction
between Internet, Intranet and Extranet that is not a matter of protocols,
but scopes in which different services are exposed.

arkin



States of Web resources are public.
States of other stuff ain't.

Rules about Web resource state changes are public.
Rules about other stuff ain't.

All public precondition expressions can be expressed
in terms of representations of Web resources.

Etc.

-Bob Haugen

Received on Tuesday, 22 October 2002 12:30:02 UTC