Re: [DotGNU]Webservice Definition

[Barry Fitzgerald]

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 16:13:00 -0600
Stephen Compall <address@hidden> wrote:

> Charles Shuller wrote:
> > The W3 defines webservice thusly:
> > 
> > [Definition: A Web service is a software application identified by a
> > 
> > URI, whose interfaces and bindings are capable of being defined, 
> > described, and discovered as XML artifacts. A Web service supports 
> > direct interactions with other software agents using XML based
> > messages exchanged via internet-based protocols.]
> >
> > Of course, maby a better question is 'Do we care what the W3 sais on
> > 
> > this matter?'
> 
> IMHO, sure XML is wonderful. But this is W3C's ego getting in the way 
> now. XML doesn't solve all the world's problems, only some of them.
> 


I tend to agree, I've always referred to them as "Network Services"
since the concept "Web Services" ties the technology down to XML and
HTTP - which is a mistake, IMO, to take such a broad phrase as "Web
Services" and latch it down so much.

Having said that, XML-RPC and SOAP style transactions are exactly what
the concept of webservices are meant to encompass.  Perhaps what we need
to do is flesh out our definition of webservices along those lines -
defining the function of those interfaces, rather than specifying them.

And, we should care what the w3c says - they're good people to work
with.  But, the w3c traditionally encompasses the work of others into
their specs over time.  Look at what happened with HTML over the years
as the versioning went upward.  Not to mention the very existance of
XML itself, and XML-RPC.

But, our work should not focus on established technologies because we
need to attain compatibility first.  We should conform to the spec in
our definition, but leave room for more technologies (like transport
via Jabber protocol) in our definition.

Anyone want to take a first stab at it? :)

        -Barry

p.s. I'll be out of e-mail contact on business until Thursday, possibly
Friday.