Re: TAG Architecture Draft

On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 08:14:54AM -0400, Champion, Mike wrote:
> It is obviously
> relevant to the WSA, and while no formal reponse from the WSA WG has been
> requested, we should read it, discuss it, consider how to align with it, and
> push back on anything that is incompatible with our view of the Web Services
> Architecture.

I would love to talk about that last part.  I think we'd all agree that
there are going to be some major disconnects, and so we should talk
about what we're going to do about them.

We've heard Roy's view on this;

  "So, given a desired set of properties, how do want to constrain the
   interaction between elements such that the desired properties are
   obtained?  That should be the focus of our architecture document.
   The constraints are the normative aspects of Web architecture --
   those things we expect W3C working groups to obey whether they like
   them or not.  They are not wishes, suggestions, or good practice --
   they are commands."

 -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Aug/0350

I don't know if Roy will get his way or not, but certainly he's quite
concerned about architectural disconnects.

> I'm not sure whether it needs a specific slot on the F2F agenda (advice
> solicited!) but it should be considered required reading, and is likely to
> come up in several contexts.

I would like to have a slot, if possible.

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

Received on Friday, 6 September 2002 09:41:29 UTC