Re: Semantic Web Services: Interest Group creation discussions

Hi Mark,

> > If a WS-IG is created with a subgroup dedicated to "Semantic Web meets
> > Web Services", what other subgroups would you like to see?
> 
> I don't know that a "subgroup" would be very useful here, nor of any
> precedence in other IGs for them.  What did you have in mind?

In the RDF-IG there are some more specialized mailing list (RDF Logic,
rdf calendar). I was thinking about a WS-IG with several dedicated mailing
list if "subgroups" are needed.

> IMO, IGs work best when interests are common, and subgroups may work
> against that.  At least that's my initial impression to the idea.

Actually, we have 2 points of view on the IG: the "WS-IG" which could be
like www-ws-arch (IMHO, good idea to take some of the general traffic
of this list) on one hand, and the "SWS-IG" which could be closer to RDFIG
and the www-ws list (DAML-related topics...) on the other hand.
What I was proposing is that both could be contained in a single WS-IG
with more than one list if needed.

> Me, I'm mostly interested in applying software architecture principles
> to the study of various architectural styles that are, or claim to be,
> suitable for large scale deployment.  As you probably know, I believe
> there are major architectural flaws with Web services that will prevent
> them from seeing much use on the wide-open Internet.
> 
> If "Reasoned bashing of Web services" is a subgroup, sign me up! 8-)

I see :)


-- 
Carine Bournez -+- W3C Sophia-Antipolis

Received on Thursday, 20 March 2003 05:39:25 UTC