- From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:13:41 -0800
- To: "He, Hao" <Hao.He@thomson.com.au>, "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
I personally would be happy if they moved in the SOA direction. But, as you say, changing frame of mind can take time. Ugo > -----Original Message----- > From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au] > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 3:11 PM > To: 'Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)'; Ugo Corda; Champion, Mike; > www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > I think grid computing can also benefit significantly if they > take a more > SOA approach. > > My personal observation is that the research community is > relatively slow on > adopting new IT concepts for good or bad. I was still doing Fortran > programming not long ago. > > Hao > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) > [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 9:49 AM > To: Ugo Corda; He, Hao; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > I stand properly corrected and slightly abashed. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 4:37 PM > To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); He, Hao; Champion, Mike; > www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > Sure it does. Many recent WSDL 2.0 discussions were actually > prompted by > grid community requirements (just search the WSDL archive for "grid"). > > Ugo > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > > Behalf Of Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) > > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 2:27 PM > > To: He, Hao; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > > > > > > Well, since Hao agrees with me, let me question the > relevance of the > > grid computing example. Does grid computing really use > WSDL and SOAP? > > > If not, it is out of scope. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au] > > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 3:32 PM > > To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > > > > +1 > > > > I think Roger has summarised very well. We are not > > prescribing. We are > > just telling people the consequences if they want to things in a way > > that is not intended, which can be totally ok under certain > > circumstance, for example, legacy integration. > > > > Hao > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) > > [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 3:13 AM > > To: He, Hao; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > > > > > > A lot of people, myself included, think that trying to do > "distributed > > > objects" using Web services is a big mistake. I seem to > recall people > > > saying that one of the goals of an architecture is to limit > > alternatives, or something like that. Surely a reasonable > thing for > > an architecture to articulate would be something like, "You > can try to > > implement objects in an SOA if you want, but that's not what > > it's for". > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org > > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On > > Behalf Of He, Hao > > Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2004 10:26 PM > > To: 'Champion, Mike'; 'www-ws-arch@w3.org ' > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > > > > hi, Mike, > > > > It appears to me that most people have, at least, agreed with the > > following: > > > > 1. The architectural goal of SOA (and WS in general) is to "achieve > > loose-coupling between interacting software agents in order to > > preserve the benefits of reusability, extensibility and simplicity." > > > > 2. Two main architectural constraints of SOA: 1) A small > set of simple > > > and ubiquitous interfaces to all participating software agents. 2) > > Descriptive messages delivered through the interfaces. > > > > I, personally, would also add extensibility as part of the > constraints > > > but Dave O would argue it is just a best practise (however, he > > believes that extensibility is important and has written a number of > > articles on > > it). > > > > As to the relationships among the terms "distributed > > system", "service > > oriented architecture," and "web service", I believe there > > are just two > > main kinds, those based on OO and those based on SOA. The confusion > > comes when one tries to do "distributed objects" using Web > services. > > > > Hao > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com] > > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 8:26 AM > > To: 'www-ws-arch@w3.org ' > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: He, Hao [mailto:Hao.He@thomson.com.au] > > > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 4:20 PM > > > To: 'Champion, Mike '; 'www-ws-arch@w3.org ' > > > Subject: RE: Proposed replacement text for Section 1.6 > > > > > I still think we need to define/explain SOA by formally > listing the > > > architectural constraints. You sort of did it but I am > strongly in > > > favor of explicitly listing them as constraints. > > > > That's what the previous draft tried to do. I struggled with that > > because I'm not at all sure how many of the SOA principles are core > > definitions, which are really architectural constraints, > and which are > > > best practices for developing *good* SOAs (e.g. coarse > granularity). > > What would you suggest as the list of constraints? > > > > > Can we also replace "There is considerable confusion in the > > computing > > > industry about the relationships among the terms > > "distributed system", > > > > > "service oriented architecture," and "web service", as well as to > > > related technologies such as ..." with something more positive? > > > > OK, propose something! I don't have a problem with changing > it, but I > > think there *is* immense confusion about this stuff. > > > > > > > > BTW, I predicted in my article > > > (http://webservices.xml.com/pub/a/ws/2003/09/30/soa.html) > > > that someone would soon replace the original meaning of SOAP with > > > Service Oriented Architecture Protocol. Now, you did it. :) > > > > I was trying to remember who I stole that from! I should > have cited > > your article too, because I remember reading it and getting > a lot out > > of it a few months ago. I remember thinking about stealing your > > CD-playing > > service example when I first started wrestling with this > action item, > > but decided that it was too informal for this document. > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 12 January 2004 18:13:42 UTC