OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: RE: [xml-dev] WSIO vs. Semantic Web - Setting the Record Straight

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]


What the WSIO has to cope with, it must cope with 
in the heat of an intense competition.  What the 
W3C has to cope with, it must in the heat of 
competing ideas and designs.  Where this converges 
is on the desktop and the server.  If you have 
tried to integrate some of the new database offerings 
with the desktop and seen the apalling gaps that 
are suddenly popping out of the drivers, it is 
obvious this won't happen overnight.  I have 
to hope the ambitious goals of the WSIO and 
Web service advocates scale to the micro world 
as well as the macro world of the Internet.  No 
amount of hype patches an ODBC error or server 
can't be found or is unavailable error.  I too 
find the prospect of Global DLL Hell not attractive.

So simple will definitely be better on this 
one, and coarse will have to work first.  In 
short form, basic interoperability of services 
is what is needed now, the Web As Enterprise, 
not As Computer.   

I need to give REST a rest for the moment and ask
what those baseline and global specs have in them 
to see what kind of patterns emerge.  If these are 
the specs the WSIO intends to factor, then that's 
where my immediate tasks are.  Like it or not, 
.NET is a fact of life for me.


-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org]

I'd say that XML-DEV collectively has a pretty good track record 
in pointing out things that eventually succeeed (SAX being the 
shining example) and giving early warning of things that are going 
to be interoperability nightmares (Namespaces and W3C schema come 
to mind).  Even Paul Prescod just asserts that the REST approach 
will probably underly the *next* generation of Web Services as the 
limitations of RPC over HTTP become apparent.  

Sure.  We as developers working for companies that must actually 
sell something have to play the hand that the market has dealt us.  
WS-I will probably play a valuable role in making sure that 
everybody knows the rules of the game.  That gives the current web 
services paradigm the best chance it will have to solve some set 
of real problems, even though that is probably a small subset of 
the problems it is being touted to solve. 

I think Tim and Tim have it right -- the W3C has no business being 
in the game of rubber stamping WSDL or trying to find the profile 
of specs from 5 different organizations that actually can be made 
to work together in the short run. This is not its core competence 
any more (although arguably that's more or less what it did with 
HTML 3.x, XML 1.0, and DOM 1.0).  The *members* of the W3C need 
exactly that, so they formed the WS-I.  

Maybe I'm getting schizoid, but I have no problem believing that 
the WS-I has an important role to play today in keeping the 
SOAP/WSDL/UDDI/WS*/J2EE/.NET house of cards from collapsing 
(recognizing that one does that with cardboard and glue). 
Nevertheless, the W3C is "right" that a Web Services architecture 
that exploits REST principles and is unencumbered by patent and 
builds on a solid understanding of metadata will work better than 
the mess that the WS-I is trying to sort out, although it may take 
a few years for this to be obvious.

Or maybe the WS-I is sorting out the basic interoperability issues 
so that J2EE and .NET can interoperate within firewalls and 
between established business parters; the W3C is (or should be, 
and XML-DEV should hold their feet to the fire) sorting out how 
this can scale to the Internet, recognizing that some refactoring 
of the WS-I output will be necessary to achieve this.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS