Re: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"

This is an interesting diagram in that in brings up some topics we haven't
brought out yet... like explicitly calling out relationships as a layer,
but it looks more like an architecture stack variation (like the ones we've
been tacking on the triangle) and the relationship of thos stack levels
to different technologies.

I agree we need to do that and Mark and I exchanged some variations that
added it.

I think this diagram is sorta scarey as a very first chart, but something
like it would be usefull later on in the discussion.

I still feel like we need a simpler first diagram.

The triangle is simple.  I don't think it confuses. I do think that it goes
down MUCH better with some words. I don't think its possible to come up
with a diagram that expresses the breadth of web services that doesn't need
a few words. The other nice thing about the triangle is that its been
around for a while as a intro to web services (not just from IBM) and many
coming to this spec may feel comfortable seeing and thinking about
it again.

Heather Kreger
Web Services Lead Architect
STSM, SWG Emerging Technology
[email protected]
919-543-3211 (t/l 441)  cell:919-496-9572


Francis McCabe <[email protected]>@w3.org on 10/01/2002 12:14:39 PM

Sent by:    [email protected]


To:    Doug Bunting <[email protected]>
cc:    [email protected]
Subject:    Re: Label for Top Node of "triangle diagram"



This is a resend of a diagram I sent out earlier.

It is different kind of diagram to the triangle as it doesn't focus on
the players in the game so much. However,  see my previous comments ;->
Frank