- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:48:52 -0400
- To: www-ws-cg@w3.org
FYI, This letter has been sent to the authors of the WS Policy documents. W3C Web Services Working Groups, in particular Description and Architecture, are of course welcome (and even expected!) to provide inputs to the proposed workshop. Philippe -------------------------- Dear WS-Policy authors, During our recent review of the Web Services specifications issued by industry, we had in-depth discussions about the set of WS Policy specifications: Framework, Attachments, Assertions, and Security. The W3C has been focusing of the core architecture of Web Services and, from our understanding of the specifications, we firmly believe that this area is part on the Core. Our review brought to light several issues regarding the specifications. We understand that these specifications are still drafts and need further development, but the specifications must be brought more closely into line with core Web services requirements. W3C can contribute to improve them substantially. For example, privacy has not been addressed (yet) by WS-Policy. We have experts in that field, and a Working Group (P3P) dedicated to that topic, who organized workshops in the past on the use of P3P beyond the scope of HTTP, and is working on addressing the privacy requirement listed in the Web Services Architecture requirement document, including the social implications. We are very concerned that if WS Policy develops without adequate coordination with privacy work at W3C, we will see fragmentation on this critical policy requirement. W3C has a clear track record of success with the P3P activity. Those interested in promoting Web Services ought to build on that, rather than try to compete against it. We also note that this area has some relation with our Composite Capabilities/Preference Profile (CC/PP) activity. We would like the work to happen within the Web Services Activity, compatible with the extensibility model provided by WSDL and its extensions, such as security. Our current plan is to organize a workshop among the members of various interested communities (WS-Policy, WSDL, P3P, OASIS related technologies, etc.) to brainstorm around the need to express the capabilities of a Web service and the constraints that need to be met to interact with it. One possible result of the workshop could be the creation of a new Working Group in the Web Services activity. and work on an enhanced version of the work done in the WS Policy area. If all goes smoothly, this workshop would take place in January 2004. The host, chairs, and program committee remain to be decided. The market is increasingly confused by the growing number of Web services specifications and their dissemination in various places, and W3C is seen as a body producing quality specifications, for the good of the Web. We believe that W3C needs to continue establishing the Core architecture of Web Services to reassure the market. Recent developments between companies or within other organizations will not help reassuring consumers, and a loss of confidence will have a negative impact on the future of Web Services. The patent policy that W3C adopted in 2003 differentiates W3C from other organizations, and contributes to W3C's being seen as a reassuring place to develop quality technologies. In short, we strongly believe that there is good technical work to be done in this area, and that W3C is the right place to do it. Are you willing to participate in a workshop on defining the constraints and capabilities for Web Services? Are you willing to bring WS Policy to W3C as one of the inputs for further work? As we are aiming for a workshop in January, we would appreciate to get your feedback no later than the end of October. We welcome proposals for hosting and chairing of this workshop. Don't hesitate to contact us for further discussion or clarification, We are looking forward to hearing from you, Hugo Haas, Web Services Activity Lead, and Philippe Le Hégaret, Architecture Domain Leader. ------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2003 15:51:07 UTC