|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Redefining the meaning of common nouns
Rick Jelliffe wrote: > "Web services" are not just CGIs, so I think Eric's definition is not > really enough. > The point about web services is that they provide some metadata that > allows you to find or use them: for example, that they may advertise > or have schemas. Rick, I think you are missing Rick's point. In 1996 Alta Vista was well-known to be a web service. It would have been common sense to say it was a web service. It was a service. It ran on the Web. Therefore, it was a web service. Many companies set up departments called "Web Services." Then some marketroid decided ot hijack the term and specialize it to "XML artificats blah blah metadata blah blah blah". That was a stupid decision. Almost everyone agrees that that was a stupid decision. The question is whether the W3C should now ratify that decision so that people like my wife and your cousin will be permanently confused about what computer people mean by "Web Service" or whether the W3C should invent a new term so that elite, cutting edge computer people can use the term the same way everyone else has been using the term as common sense since the mid 90s. > So that some software can say "I want to find a certain service" or > some other software can also say "tell me what format/schema is being > used." According to this definition, eBay, Google and Yahoo are not web services. This will surprise literally millions of people. More people than have ever heard of XML schema or WSDL. Paul Prescod
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||

Cart








