Re: [AMG] Figure 2.1 suggested revision.

Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:

> What about XMLP Service ? This would fit nicely with the forthcoming workshop on
> Web Services...

(I assume you meant to say "XMLP Service-user" and not  "XMLP Service")

This confusion between service in the abstract and real service is what I think we
need to avoid. In the abstract (the old OSI service conventions),  layer N provides
"service" to layer N+1.  I think we need to avoid using "service" in that sense.
The workshop is about applications. That's what they mean by "services".

I also don't like the use of "client" in this context, because of the confusion with
the client/server model.

 I suggest "XMLP user".

--Ray


--
Ray Denenberg
Library of Congress
rden@loc.gov
202-707-5795

Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2001 13:25:54 UTC