[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Basically, virtual, yes? One doesn't care how it is done, just
that the interface contract is understood. After that, the worry
is QOS. (See why Red Hat believes Linux will win on the Internet.
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20020204/tc/q_a_red_hat_ceo_says_linux_won_t_rule_1.html )
If they are right, then using a QOS determinant, one could theoretically
search for a service, hook up, test, and if the service QOS numbers are
high enough, the Linux servers would win and in a matter of days or hours,
all of the MS server lights would stop blinking (basically the
same phenomenon as hits on an overbuilt slow web page).
I'm mystified if there is a point to the thread.
UDDI, WSFL, etc. are there so that web services
can work like this over standard plumbing.
The trick is simply knowing a target that does what you expect it to:
ontological commitment, as the AI guys say. Hook up and if the
other side defects, defect as well. If it really works like
the Red Hat CEO claims, ecological effects will kill off the
slowest runners.
I don't think it works quite as he describes, but that is a
different issue. There are few pure plays in business.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com]
a verb.
Yes, although I would draw the distinction between "understanding of a verb"
at a business process layer vs. "understanding of a verb" at an API layer.
The latter is RPC, the former is semantics attached to the document within a
context larger than the document itself. These distinctions are meaningless
at the protocol layer; it is just XML over some sort of transport. The
distinctions are relevant in the larger context.
|
