- From: Edwin Khodabakchian <edwink@collaxa.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:44:34 -0800
- To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> > For example, IMAP, and whatever it's architectural style is > called. 8-) It defines a network interface to mail servers. > It's the only abstraction that an IMAP client needs to deal > with in order to interact with a variety of third party mail > servers who have exposed their server's functionality and > data via the IMAP protocol. > Mark, Can't we imagine, Web Services being an architecture allowing people to build protocols such as IMAP, LDAP, etc..at lower costs? Cost being: - cost of "deploying" support for the protocol across the nodes of the network. - cost for modelling and advertising data exchanged back and forth - cost for the developer to learn how to integrate that protocol into its application/environment. Is there something fundamentally bad with allowing *some* services such as a credit card processor to have their own protocol? Edwin
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2003 23:44:51 UTC