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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Redefining the meaning of common nouns

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

From: "Paul Prescod" <paul@prescod.net>

> I thought that the point about Web Services(TM) was that they were 
> interfaces to services intended to be processed by machines rather than 
> presented to human beings.


>  I would posit that less than 1 in 20 
> "self-declared Web Services" uses any formal discovery mechanism and 
> less than half have a service discovery.

To explain my POV, let me make a distinction between a resource being
"on" the Web or "in" the Web.  If it is merely "on" the Web, it does not have any links 
pointing to it.  If a resource is "in" the Web, it has links from other resources to it.
So Google is great because it puts a lot of resources that are "on" the Web "in"to the
Web: a discovery or advertising service. 

A service that has no means of discovery (i.e. a link) or advertising is "on" the Web but not
"in" the Web, under those terms.  It just happens to use a set of protocols but it
is not part of a web.  So it should not be called a web service, just an unlinked-to resource.

Of course, I understand that many people want to define the WWW as a namespace of
URIs rather than as a web of nodes and arcs: a resource without any links is a fly
waiting to be caught in the Web.  

Rick Jelliffe 


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

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