- From: Katia Sycara <katia@cs.cmu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:33:46 -0500
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
+1 --Katia -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Champion, Mike Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 2:59 PM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: RE: Issue 5; GET vs GetLastTradePrice > -----Original Message----- > From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 2:37 PM > To: 'Champion, Mike'; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: Issue 5; GET vs GetLastTradePrice > > > > > > etc. The point being that maybe Web services is bigger than > > > the Web, in the > > > sense that the Web made certain optimizations that Web > > > services can't make > > > because Web services is targetting a wider scope of applications. The more I think about this, the more I agree with it. It's liberating, in a way, to at least allow for the possibility that (terminology aside!!!) Web services are a superset of "the Web" rather than the subset of the Web that involves machine-to-machine interaction. [One could also argue that everything with a URI is on "the Web", so any service that follows our (probable) recommendation to identify key components with a URI would be on the Web...] And for those who will question why the W3C is dealing with "Web services" if they transcend the Web, I have two answers: 1 - The W3C Advisory Committee and Membership appears to strongly endorse it. 2 - XML also transcends the Web.
Received on Thursday, 2 January 2003 16:34:01 UTC