- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:30:34 -0400
- To: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org, mark.baker@sympatico.ca
Anne, I agree 100%. Web services written to SOAP 1.1 services do have their own architecture, it's just that nobody's written it down yet. On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 06:27:55PM -0400, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > Mark, > > Software conforms to an architecture, not the other way around. Well, sort of I'd say. Software *has* an architecture, whether or not somebody's written it down. > We're defining an architecture for the future. We don't need to rely on what > people have implemented today. Absolutely. But I thought we all agreed that we would start (i.e. first draft) on documenting the architecture of SOAP 1.1 and WSDL 1.1 based Web services. No? [big snip] > It's time to spend some > time ironing out an architecture that properly exploits the advantages of > all three systems: SOA, XML, and the Web. In the interests of expediting this process, I'll refrain from getting into that at this point. But I'd like to ask you for a pointer to a definition of what a service oriented architecture is. From what I can extract from the context in which the term is used, the Web already is an SOA. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Monday, 23 September 2002 22:30:19 UTC