- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:07:55 -0400
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 09:26:07AM -0400, Champion, Mike wrote: > > I'd be all for removing any mention of SOAs, if only because I can't > > think of a distributed system which isn't about services. Email, ftp, > > irc, the Web; all are SOAs. Besides, we'd have to define it, and we > > know how icky getting concensus on definitions can be. 8-/ > > We can't avoid this term, it's pervasive. Icky consensus building is what > we do! Well, the term is very commonly used to suggest that Web services *adds* a service-oriented bent to the Web, when in fact the Web already had it, just a very decentralized one. I would personally prefer to avoid terms that bring along baggage like this, as it just makes understanding and respecting Web architecture that much more difficult. > That said, we can't get sidetracked by this. The first page of Google hits > for "service oriented architecture" has the definitions quoted above. They > are pretty consistent. Let's let the editors tweak the wording, get it in > the documents, and move on. Ok. As long as the definition and our use of the term doesn't suggest that Web services are in any way adding any SOA-capabilities to the Web, I'm (relatively) happy. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 10:06:05 UTC