RE: Web Services specs + Rant

I would also say that if there are a manageable number of standards, with clear mappings between them, the situation is not too bad.  Think of ASCII and EBCDIC, SAE and Metric, Fahrenheit and Celcius, WS-Reliability and WS-ReliableMessaging...

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of David Orchard
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 12:33 PM
To: 'Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)'; 'Mark Little'; www-ws-arch@w3.org;
'Paul Denning'
Subject: RE: Web Services specs + Rant




> The Reliable Messaging situation is, in my view, particularly 
> egregious.
> There is, in my opinion, no good reason why the companies involved in
> those two specs could not have played with each other -- and, again in
> my opinion, the world does not need two non-interoperable Web services
> reliable messaging specs.  I fail to see how anyone wins in this
> situation.  Eventually I suppose it will sort itself out, but in the
> meantime ... everybody loses.  At least, everybody that has a stake in
> implementing Web services in B2B.  Maybe that leaves WalMart 
> and AS2 the
> potential winners.
> 

While this situation might appear egregious, I don't think it really is.  At the end of the day, customers such as yourself are probably going to buy software products that support reliable messaging specifications.  From your perspective if you are buying a product and using it to talk to a partner, you and your partner only have a problem if your respective products support different specifications and it is difficult to map between the specifications.  I personally don't see this happening with reliable messaging.  

Cheers,
Dave

Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2003 17:01:40 UTC