Re: Nailing down the definition of "Web services" and the scope of WS A for the document

>
>
>So, is this at least a good starting point for a consensus on how to define
>"Web service" and "XML/WSA-compliant Web service" in the WSA document?  Who
>on the WG can't live with it?  Who outside the WG wishes to strenuously
>object? And what should the scope of the WSA require ...interfaces that CAN
>be described in a machine-processable language or interfaces that MUST be
>described in a machine-processable description language?  What other
>wordsmithing would anyone propose?
>

What does MUST mean?

Does it mean that the service definition language should be able to 
support all the Web services we can invent? Sounds like a requirement 
for WSDL. But you still need to define what these services are in order 
to meet this requirement. So what is a Web service?

Does it mean that the service must be designed such that it yields to 
being defined by such a language? In this case is WSDL 1.2 a restriction 
on what things can be Web services, or is the concept of such a language 
the restriction? And what exactly does it mean, can't any service out 
there be described by WSDL with the proper amount of abstraction (e.g. 
message part="xsd:anyType")?

Does it mean that the lifetime of the service as a "Web service" is 
demarcated by the lifetime of such a definition? Let's assume my service 
has such a definition and is now being used by multiple clients. That 
definition is contained in some HTTP site and is accessible from many 
places, including several UDDI directories. All of a sudden one of my 
disks fails and the document is lost forever. No definition until I get 
the time to recreate it which considering the effect of the crash may be 
a week or two from now. Do I need to broadcast a message to the world 
indicating that my Web service is no longer "a Web service"?

arkin

Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2003 17:32:23 UTC