RE: Normative constraints on the WSA

+1 : exactly my feelings.

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Newcomer, Eric [mailto:Eric.Newcomer@iona.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2003 10:50 AM
> To: Walden Mathews; Baker, Mark; Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Normative constraints on the WSA
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The trouble with all this, as we've said many times, is that 
> Web services are not the same as the Web.  They are not 
> indented for the same usage patterns, developer audience, or 
> business model.  
> 
> Let's especially remember that technology by itself is 
> useless - it is only useful within the context of its 
> application.  Web services are not intended to solve the same 
> problem as the Web, and businesses are not interested in 
> academic exercises like REST and other characterizations of 
> what is "good" vs "bad" architecture, what is "ancient" vs 
> "modern" etc.
> 
> I doubt Web services are progress.  But I don't think that's 
> bad, since they have significant application in business.  
> The Web does not.
> 
> Let's please forget about REST, the Semantic Web, and the 
> other academic exercises and focus on solving problems for business.  
> 
> The W3C is already in danger of losing its relevance in Web 
> services, but perhaps that's self evident by the traffic on 
> this list, which grows increasingly "REST-ish" and less and 
> less oriented toward improving Web services as they have been 
> accepted.
> 
> Criticisms founded on purely technical grounds or on the 
> subject of "architectural purity" completely miss the point 
> of what we need to do.  At the end of the day, marketplace 
> acceptance is the only measure that matters for a standard, 
> and the current Web services have been widely adopted.  
> 
> None of these purity arguments are going to change commercial 
> reality.  But they can take us further and further away from 
> being relevant.
> 
> I know exactly what the "Web heads" (sorry Spidey!) are going 
> to say:  The Web is a commercial and marketplace success.  
> Sure it is.  It's great for publishing, academic research, 
> and a certain amount of retail commerce.  But that does not 
> mean it is also going to succeed at Web services.  Almost by 
> definition it is not, since it hasn't.
> 
> So - anyone out there on this list still want to work on Web 
> services?  Or should we just give in and say that Web 
> services are the same as the Web?
> 
> Eric
>

Received on Saturday, 17 May 2003 14:29:06 UTC