- From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:12:41 -0700
- To: "Francis McCabe" <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Frank, Are you referring to a set of Web services mutually related through a choreography context? If that is the case, one of the choreography groups would probably be the right place to ask for the composite identifier you are talking about. Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis McCabe [mailto:fgm@fla.fujitsu.com] > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 10:37 AM > To: Sanjiva Weerawarana > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: There is no spoon Neo > > > > Identifying Web service with a single entrypoint is fine; except that > in the real world most people consider a Web service to denote a > related set of entrypoints. (My terminology: to avoid getting into > semantics). > > I.e., most people will need to describe/manage/deal with sets > of these > things in a coherent way. This is precisely what the concept of a > composite web service is targeted at. > > If you restrict the concept of Web service to the single entrypoint > case, you `solve' one problem (what is meant by a Web > service's URI for > example) but leave unanswered the larger scale issues. > > Frank > > On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 10:22 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > > > "Francis McCabe" <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com> writes: > >> > >> This proposal is only going to fly technically if we also grasp the > >> composite service nettle. > > > > I'm sorry but I don't understand; can you elaborate please? > > > > Sanjiva. > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 28 April 2003 14:12:52 UTC