- From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:27:29 -0500
- To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
On Sat, 2004-11-20 at 22:59, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > . . . > I don't like the re-introduction of "agent" .. we took this up > and dealt with it once before. What???!! For goodness sake, this is not re-introducing the term "agent" for general use throughout our document! This is merely providing a definition of "node"! It would be ridiculous for our document to even avoid making *reference* to the WS Arch terms in the definitions of our own terms. > We already use terms "service client" and "service provider". . . . We do *not* already use either of those terms. We use the terms "client" and "service"! One of the problems with the term "service provider" is that it is ambiguous: sometimes it refers to the software agent that implements the service, and sometimes it refers to the person or organization that offers the service. That kind of ambiguity is harmful, particularly in a definition whose entire purpose is to add precision. These terminology issues were already discussed at great length in the WS Arch WG. -- David Booth W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 15:27:36 UTC