Lists Home |
Date Index |
Bob Wyman wrote:
> The list omits WS-Events and WS-Eventing which are "competitors"
> to WS-Notification. (Note: I think WS-Eventing may have been dropped, but
> WS-Events still appears to live.)
Actually WS-Eventing is new and very much alive . WS-Events was
submitted to the OASIS WSDM TC at some point, but I'm not privy to the
details beyond that (I'm not a member of the WSDM TC).
> The whole Web Services space is one that is based more on hope
> than any real evidence of success. There are dozens of companies that have
> invested heavily in this space and thousands of individuals who have tied
> their hopes to the idea of Web Services. The mere fact that nothing useful
> seems to be coming out of the expenditure of all this energy doesn't seem
> to have dimmed the desire to make it happen.
Please support your argument with concrete examples, for our benefit.
> But, the basic ideas behind Web Services are really great!
> Distributed applications are, in fact, a really wonderful idea. They were
> back when we first started implementing them seriously back in the early
> 80's and they still are today. The idea of having standard interchange
> formats and describing your interfaces with formal definition languages
> like WSDL is also a good one that has been well proven over time. ASN.1,
> CORBA IDL, many RPC interfaces, XML, and, of course, lots of IETF and ISO
> standards have validated these ideas. We should also be particularly
> supportive of the attention that the WS-* folk give to reuse of standards.
> The mere fact that they seem to insist on defining new standards before
> they are willing to reuse them
Please cite specific cases of this.
> should not take away from our appreciation
> of their appreciation of reuse as a concept.
> Finally, it should be noted that the really great thing about the
> WS space is that it is *really* easy to put together a working group and
> get your very own personal WS-* specification written and announced as a
> standard. The traditional standards forums (ISO, IETF, etc.) are much more
> difficult to work through and result in much greater sharing of the credit
> than is typical of the groups that get WS-* stuff written up. The other
> thing that is nice about WS-* stuff is that since there aren't many
> working examples of the stuff
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
> it is really easy to present one's self as
> an "expert" without having to deal with the embarrasment of failed or
> competitive implementations. (If a standard is never deployed, noone can
> *really* say if it is any good...) All of these factors and others tend to
> produce an environment which is very attractive to individuals and
> companies who seek to feel like they are leaders on the bleeding edge.
> There are few areas in our business today that can offer so much personal
> reward and so much press coverage in return for so little useful output.
> bob wyman
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Bray [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 3:04 PM
> To: email@example.com DEV
> Subject: [xml-dev] WS-Emperor naked?
> Would anyone here like to argue that the list found in
> is coherent, or sensible, or viable, or generally that the parrot is
> not dead?
Booz | Allen | Hamilton