RE: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Walden Mathews
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:38 PM
> To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Snapshot of Web Services Glossary
>
>
>
> >
> > This seems close enough for our immediate purposes.  Truly precise
> > definitions will not be nailed down EVER, because the meanings
> will change
> > as the world around us changes.
>
> Come on now, Mike, that's dodging the task.
>
> >
> > http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci213080,00.html
> >
> > "2) In program-to-program communication, synchronous communication
> requires
> > that each end of an exchange of communication respond in turn without
> > initiating a new communication. A typical activity that might use a
> > synchronous protocol would be a transmission of files from one point to
> > another. As each transmission is received, a response is returned
> indicating
> > success or the need to resend. Each successive transmission of data
> requires
> > a response to the previous transmission before a new one can be
> initiated.
> > Synchronous program communication is contrasted with
> asynchronous program
> > communication. "
>
> I've been waiting to hear Arkin's objection.  By this definition,
> TCP can't
> be considered synchronous, nor could any sliding window protocol.

I agree. This is not a definition as much as a specific use case that may
apply to some protocols (it should work for HTTP) but not for others (like
TCP).

Same for the second part. It's correct but it really describes a use case
rather than being generic.

arkin

>
>
> >
> > " In computer programs, asynchronous operation means that a process
> operates
> > independently of other processes, whereas synchronous operation
> means that
> > the process runs only as a result of some other process being
> completed or
> > handing off operation. A typical activity that might use a synchronous
> > protocol would be a transmission of files from one point to another. As
> each
> > transmission is received, a response is returned indicating
> success or the
> > need to resend. Each successive transmission of data requires a response
> to
> > the previous transmission before a new one can be initiated. "
> >
>
> I'd be surprised if the above helped anyone understand the architecture
> document or the usage scenarios, but what do I know?  The first part
> begs a definition of "independently of other processes".
> Clearly, one thing
> that communicating processes do is synchronize.  Where does that leave
> us?
>
> WM

Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 22:11:54 UTC