- From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 09:55:40 -0500
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
If you subtract the emotionally loaded and fundamentally meaningless -- and gratuitous -- comments, there is substance in this article. There's also a lot of nonsense. I think that the substance would be easier to deal with, and in fact the impact of the analysis greater, without the nonsense. Of course I agree with the thought that it is a good idea for end user companies to be involved with the process. It is, however, not always an easy thing to justify the cost of this involvement to the company. -----Original Message----- From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 9:14 PM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: CIO.com story on WS standards Several members of this list were on a panel discussion at Web Services Edge today about WS standards, led by Anne Manes. She used this article http://www.cio.com/archive/100103/standards.html as discussion fodder, and others may find it interesting. "Everyone wants Web services standards. CEOs think the technology will create new opportunities. CFOs believe it will save millions. Vendors see a pot of gold at the end of the Web services rainbow. And CIOs know that linking to customers and partners over the Internet will revolutionize both business and IT. So what's the holdup? The usual suspects: Politics. Ego. Suspicion. Fear. Greed. " Who, us? :-) But seriously, while I disagree with much of it, we clearly do have to consider it as a datapoint about the public perception of what we (collectively, not just WSA WG or W3C) do. Paul Krill of InfoWorld was in the audience; it will be interesting to see if he writes anything about the panelists' collective rebuttal.
Received on Friday, 3 October 2003 10:56:05 UTC