Mark,
I can't claim deep expertise but the people I work with who are building the
UDDI/WSDL/SOAP world have a very clear idea of what Web Services means. I agree
that the phrase is also used in a hand waving way too, but there is a kernel
of very precise technical solutions that is essentially unknown in the IETF.
I'm not using it as an example - it *is* the deployment arena for SOAP.
Brian
Mark Baker wrote:
Putting the Web Services world in a situation where it needs a discovery
protocol
to find out how to layer SOAP is not at all an abstract issue. Or do you
think
the WSDL for each Web Service is going to define the available layerings?
What
is a poor vendor to do other than support all of them, and what is the
technical
justification for that? imho this is an absolutely valid last call issue.
(If this had been a WG work item, it would have been discussed as a WG
charter
issue.)
I don't have an opinion on the larger issue here, but I did want to
point out that the "Web Services world" is far from clear about what
it wants to achieve, let alone *how*. There exists major architectural
disconnects between existing Web architecture, and the architecture
commonly associated to "Web Services".
IMO, it's premature to use that as an example.
MB