RE: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"

"Christopher B Ferris" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch
Message-ID <OFA27A4648.A65C2665-ON85256C41.006D9C8D-85256C41.00704B63@rchland.ibm.com>
+1

I want to emphasize that Heather is talking about ROLES here, not things, 
not
mechanisms. A role is an abstraction as are the other nodes (roles) in the 
triangle
diagram.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: [email protected]
phone: +1 508 234 3624

Heather Kreger wrote on 09/27/2002 03:46:56 PM:

> 
> The triangle is a logical look at some roles:
> requester/provider/registry-cloud-thing, some communications: publish,
> find, interact, and some artifacts: service, service description.
> 
> The fact that you can implement any of these as a web service itself is
> orthogonal.
> 
> Other things we seem to be introducting, like intermediaries, can also 
be
> realized as web services. In fact, an intermediary might function both 
as
> an intermediary and a useful service in his own right accessed directly 
by
> other web service requesters.
> 
> And yes, I can seem many useful ways to realize some of our other roles 
as
> web services (security manager? etc.)
> 
> This does not break my head. This just means that the fundamental
> characteristics we define for web services can be shared by other roles 
as
> well. Its a feature, not a bug. :-)
> 
> Heather Kreger
> Web Services Lead Architect
> STSM, SWG Emerging Technology
> [email protected]
> 919-543-3211 (t/l 441)  cell:919-496-9572
> 
> 
> "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <[email protected]>@w3.org on
> 09/27/2002 02:50:02 PM
> 
> Sent by:    [email protected]
> 
> 
> To:    "'Dave Hollander'" <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> cc:
> Subject:    RE: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys are making my head hurt.  It just became clear to me that the
> "cloud" is, itself, a web service.  So somehow we are defining web 
services
> in some kind of recursive way?
> 
> Ouch!
> 
> I'm liking the triangle less an less by the minute.  Sorry -- maybe I'm
> just
> misunderstanding here, but ...
> 
> If the cloud is, in fact, a web service -- then it seems to me that 
there
> are two and only two reasonable diagrams for a web service, the cloud
> simply
> being a replication of one of these fundamental components used for the
> special purpose of discovering and describing the availability of web
> services:
> 
> 1)Requestor/Receiver <-> Responder
> 
> 2)Requestor -> Responder -> Receiver
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Hollander [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 1:05 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that registries are not the only way to implement discovery! 
That
> is
> why i quoted "place", but apparently I was not clear. I think we
> intuitively
> knew this when we agreed that a --cloud-- was the best graphical icon 
for
> this node.
> 
> Advertising - web pages advertise by being part of a hypertext network. 
If
> I
> want a search engine to find my page, I have to
> make sure it is either in its explicit listing of pages (registry) or
> linked
> to from a page that is.
> 
> Web services are not hypertext--there is no way to start at a
> node and explore links described at that node. Hence they need to 
advertise
> in some form...either by phone, email to other service developers or
> describe themselves to a well known mechanism (typically a registry).
> 
> 
> Description - I am very interested in where and how people
> believe description happens. Is it an atomic transaction-- fully 
described
> in one interchange--or composite? Who is
> responsible for what roles? How can you use a --cloud-- to
> find a service if the --cloud-- does not provide some description? Will 
we
> have to inquire directly to each service to select between them?  Is
> description narrowly defined as the data in WSDL or does it include UDDI
> concepts and others? I prefer the broader sense.
> 
> 
> "Advertising and Discovery Mechanisms" - I could live with this but am 
not
> afraid to use "services" either. I think we should describe them as
> services, and as we add security, management, QOS etc we will end up
> describing services. But that is a debate for a later day.
> 
> 
> DaveH
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ricky Ho [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 11:03 AM
> To: Dave Hollander; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"
> 
> 
> I think "registry" (in the way you describe it) is one way to implement 
a
> "discovery" mechanism.  The "roles" that you describe about a "registry"
> implies a centralized place where information is kept.  But "registry"
> shouldn't be the ONLY way to implement discovery.  For example, a
> peer-to-peer approach can be used to implement the discovery mechanism
> ...  My response inline ...
> 
> >The roles, as I understand them, are:
> >1) a "place" to advertise a service's availability
> 
> [Ricky]
> Do we really require the service to explicitly "ADVERTISE" its 
availability
> in a particular "PLACE" ?  Think about a web page, you don't need to
> advertise it and still able to be found in search engine.  What can't 
the
> service provider be using similar mechanism ?
> 
> >2) an agency that brokers services' descriptions
> 
> [Ricky]
> Like WSIL, we can discover the service's description at the endpoint. It
> doesn't have to be in a separate agency.
> 
> >3) a "place" to discover what services are availabile
> 
> [Ricky]
> Again, it doesn't has to be "a place"
> 
> 
> >Are these right?
> >
> >If so, my preferences:
> >
> >1) Advertising and Discovery Services
> 
> [Ricky]
> By the term "service", are you implying it has a WSDL description, and a
> particular endpoint address where the service is provided ?
> Or are we actually talking about an "Advertising and Discovery 
Mechanism" ?
> 
> >2) Services Description and Discovery
> 
> [Ricky]
> They sounds to be different animals.
> 
> >3) Services Registries
> 
> [Ricky]
> This sounds to me strongly implying a "separate place" which I don't 
think
> is a necessary distinction.
> 
> Rgds, Ricky
> 
> 
> 
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.