Vaughn,
I think WSDM is made up of the
following:
- It is a profile on WSRF/WSN which are protocols. Is a
profile of a protocol a protocol?
- It is a management framework in that several management
capabilities are defined. But these capabilities are defined on top of the
profile mentioned above. The above profile is the core of
WSDM.
- MOWS is a model for Web service
manageability.
Bryan
From: Vaughn Bullard
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005
6:34 PM
To:
Subject: [wsdm] Usage
of the word of "Protocol" within the Primer
Hey
folks,
Just separating the
daylights out this Primer and was wondering if WSDM is defining a "protocol" or
a framework? According to Webster's, a protocol is a set of rules
determining the format and transmission of data. Now, transmission to me
means seems to imply how something is implemented. Are we seeking to
define how the transmission is implemented? The
format of the transmission, yes, I believe so. However, should we not seek
to keep implementation out of the mix? I know that Web Services is how
we'll do it; however should we limit ourselves by WSDM's current
implementation? Abstraction I'm sure is the goal. I'm sure we would
want the standard to last farther than a few years.
Take HTTP-now that
is a protocol. SOAP is a protocol. But WSDM is taking advantage of
the SOAP protocol as format protocol and HTTP as the transport protocol.
So are we providing the framework to sit on the top of these protocols or the
protocol? I say framework but please correct me if I'm
off-base.
Sorry to be such a
nitpick, but I'm German and I'm an engineer; a culturally genetic form of the
Obsessive-Compulsive. :)
Bonsoir und Guten
Abend!
Thanks
again,
Vaughn
Bullard
Technical
Consultant
AmberPoint,
Inc.
Phone:
703.475.4800
Cell
703.542.2352 Home/Home
Office
301.760.4935
International Skype number, when calling
S’MAIL:
22780 Highcrest
Circle
Brambleton, Virginia 20148
E-Mail:
– Work
email
– Personal
email
-
SMS/Phone email
