- From: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:02:20 -0400
- To: "Cutler, Roger \(RogerCutler\)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
I raised a discussion on the WS-Desc list suggesting that they really should identify a Web service by a URI rather than just a Qname. I was a little surprised by the resistence to such a concept. I got the sense that a lot of people didn't understand what in fact the URI was meant to identify. I don't know what the end decision on the discussion was. I believe it was discussed at the last meeting. But I do think that the architecture group should have some influence on the discussion. If the architecture group believes that a Web service should be named by a URI, then the WS-Desc team should provide a means to capture that name in the WSDL description. From my perspective, a Web service is an "important" resource, and as the Web Architecture says, all "important" resources should have a URI. I also expect that a Web service may be described by a variety of description languages (WSDL, DAML, text documents, etc.) and so there ought to be a means of referring to the Web service that doesn't depend on just one description language (a URI derived from the wsdl:service Qname). Anne ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com> To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>; <www-ws-arch@w3.org> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 10:47 AM Subject: RE: Definition for a Web Service > > I think that this happened because of all the confusion about URI's and > QNames. As I understand it (and I am very willing to admit that I > understand this imperfectly), just about everyone concerned would be > VERY happy to say that Web services are identified by URI's -- except > that currently in WSDL they are identified by a Qname -- which is not > exactly a URI but can be mapped to a URI. This, at the least, adds a > layer of confusion to any conversation on this subject. I think that > the basic thinking was that the "Web-related standards" would lead one > sort of inevitably to URI's, and that the detailed issues could be dealt > with ... in the detailed sections, I guess. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr] > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 3:45 AM > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Definition for a Web Service > > > > Thanks for the new draft; obviously, this is the result of a lot of > efforts! > > Regarding the new definition for a Web Service: apart from being more > specific (WSDL, SOAP, HTTP), which I like, the other major difference > seems to be that a Web Service is no longer identified by a URI. Is this > > intentional? Shouldn't this be added back? > > <previousDefinition> > A Web service is a software system identified by a URI [...]. > </previousDefinition> > > Comments? > > Jean-Jacques. > > Champion, Mike wrote: > > > Update from the W3C publication team: > > > > New WD of "Web Services Architecture" Document is available at : > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-ws-arch-20030808/ > > > > >
Received on Monday, 11 August 2003 14:05:56 UTC