[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Two sides of SOAP (was RE: SOAP-RPC and REST and

• To: "'Paul Prescod'" <paul@p...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Two sides of SOAP (was RE: SOAP-RPC and REST and security)
• From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@A...>
• Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:05:51 -0800

> From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@p...]

<snip/>

> I have no way to know whether I can trust the WSIO and I have no idea
> what the politics of it are. I do know that I've seen 
> petitions seem to
> work at the W3C. As in petitioned ideas seem to find their ways into
> specifications.

I don't think it is a matter of trust. I think it is more a matter of public
scrutiny. If there were a petition from members of the development community
that was able to draw some media attention, then the WSIO would have to
respond in some fashion.

I think it would be hard for the WSIO to completely dismiss it if it got
media attention. There is a growing number of voices calling for vendors to
be held legally liable for security lapses. I think it would be hard for the
WSIO to dismiss a publicized petition against this backdrop. I would think
that companies involved in the WSIO would instead (if they are smart) see it
as an opportunity to stave off regulation by proving they are willing to put
their own house in order.

Even if that were not to be the case, I think there could still be value. It
could get some developers out there who weren't thinking about this stuff to
think about it. The WSIO is just a bunch of vendors who want to sell their
wares. If the folks buying the wares start asking for tools that better
address security concerns, the vendors will respond.

• Prev by Date: RE: 14 Theses around "Namespace Documents"
• Next by Date: Re: Worse XML tools?
• Previous by thread: RE: Two sides of SOAP (was RE: SOAP-RPC and REST and security)
• Next by thread: XML & government in general
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread