- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:11:00 -0500
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
I just wanted to say up front that I wasn't aware that the purpose of this diagram was to relate the different models. I thought it was just to describe the model in its own terms. So with that in mind ... On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 01:03:07AM -0500, Champion, Mike wrote: > > I wouldn't think that a resource model needs a separate > > discovery service. Representations facilitate discovery. > > I think we in the WG generally see Google, etc. as well as UDDI registries > (and ebXML registries?), not to mention the Semantic Web, as discovery > services. It's hard for me to see how we could ignore all that and just say > that somehow "representations facilitate discovery". Sure, discovery > happens by all sorts of means, manual and automatic, semantically aware and > not, but it *does* happen, and agents that facilitate it are "discovery > services." Agreed. But I also see my home page as a discovery service, as I can link to anything with a URI from it. So IMO, all resource-model services can be discovery services. > A Web server is a particular kind of service that provides representation > transfer services, IMHO. That's one way to look at it, sure, and a very useful way in some contexts. But here, I think it might be too confusing, as I think you want to be able to distinguish between, say, a stock quote service and a weather service on the same Web server. As we're trying to relate diagrams here, I think it's probably better to say something like; service - is a - graph of resources Web server - proxies for - resources Web server - provides - representations Web server - accepts - representations > Recall that we've > abandoned all hope of writing a W3C Recommendation and fitting this > rigorously in with the Webarch, and are now trying to write down what *we* > have learned from the exercise so that future travellers into this tar pit > know where the really sticky places are. Ok, gotcha. I don't want to get in the way of you folks documenting what you've learned as a group. > > BTW, I'd also suggest that the agent discovers the URI rather > > than the resource. > > Has the TAG said anything relevant to this point? If not, and unless this > is well established in linguistic philosophy or whatever, I would prefer > not to get into such a fine distinction. In common language, one discovers > the thing itself, not the identity of the thing. In Web services, one > probably wants to discover all the information about a service to see if it > really does what one needs to do, not simply the URI of a service that is > purported to do what one thinks one wants to do. Just posing the issue > makes my head hurt! I didn't think that would be controversial, as any software agent can never know of me (a resource), only an identifier for me, and representations of me. But if you disagree, than I suppose that's controversial by definition. 8-) Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Friday, 19 December 2003 11:13:05 UTC