Re: Messaging Service Layer
Mark Baker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0500, Champion, Mike wrote: > I'm just not seeing this thread going anywhere. Mark and Walden seem to > want some genuflection to the non-normative (either in W3C or IETF) 7-layer > model. Others say that this is pointless because everything we're talking > about is essentially at the "application" layer. The counter-argument that > one doesn't NEED HTTP, SMTP, etc to do web serivces message "transport" > because it could go over TCP/IP directly misses the point that what we're > doing is required to be protocol-neutral. Protocol independance/neutrality can be achieved in two ways; by treating application protocols as a transport protocol (the preferred approach, apparently), or by extending application protocols (the "chameleon" approach). Failing to make this distinction, while using the existence of the requirement to justify ignoring a proven model that may help to explain it, is a nasty catch-22. I am in the process of writing a short essay on the subject. I'll let the group know when I'm done. > How about if Mark or Walden just submit an issue against the next public > draft of the WSA document so that we make sure that we say SOMETHING about > it (suggest wording, even) so we can get on with more pressing topics? Sure, sounds good. I'll do that. But I'm not going to suggest text, because I believe that any wording that defends such a position is prima facie incorrect. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis