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

Re: WS-Emperor naked?

• To: xml-dev@l... DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: WS-Emperor naked?
• From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 15:52:14 -0500
• In-reply-to: <E1FB3A8E-84E0-11D8-ABCB-000A95A51C9E@t...>
• References: <E1FB3A8E-84E0-11D8-ABCB-000A95A51C9E@t...>

On Apr 2, 2004, at 3:04 PM, Tim Bray wrote:

> Would anyone here like to argue that the list found in
>
>  http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/04/01/WS-Mumble
>
> is coherent, or sensible, or viable, or generally that the parrot is 
> not dead?
>

The list is woefully incomplete; the emperor has far more imaginary 
jewels on his costume than you list :-)  See 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2004Feb/0022.html and 
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?WebServicesSpecifications 
for more.  Bill de Hora has an RSS feed with updates at 
http://www.dehora.net/rss/wsasf-rss10.xml

I dunno ... having not had to worry about this since the W3C axed the 
WS Arch group.  The parrot is squawking pretty loudly; I don't think 
he's dead.  On the other hand, he's not singing sweet melodies in 
harmony with the other parrots (hmm, I don't think parrots ever do 
that, but who am I to miss the opportunity to beat a metaphor to 
death?).  There are a lot of problems chasing web services solutions, 
solutions chasing real problems, and monopolists looking for a way to 
stifle the competition in this space.  It's ugly.

So, IMHO it's not even remotely sensible; on the other hand I think the 
chaos is a sign of vitality rather than a death struggle.  As with most 
everything, there is a small subset of this stuff that really and truly 
works, and lots of real enterprises are using SOAP and WSDL (and of 
course HTTP and XML) for integration projects.  The much-maligned UDDI 
is coming to its own as a way of managing enterprise metadata about all 
sorts of stuff, including web services.  I've never heard of any of our 
customers (mostly big organizations with lots of big iron) making more 
than polite inquiries about the WS-* stack, but they're mostly doing 
this behind the firewall and over proprietary MOM transports, so 
security, reliability, transactions, etc. are not a WS issue yet.  
There is a LOT of pent-up demand for WS-Security so that this stuff can 
work in B2B scenarios without having to agree on the security 
infrastructure a priori.  I would bet (not the farm, but a modest chunk 
of a paycheck) that BPMN and BPEL are going to emerge from the vapor 
pretty soon, but there are already some cracks showing in in the facade 
of unity (e.g. BPELJ).

• References:
  • WS-Emperor naked?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XSD "simpleType" validation for strings
• Next by Date: Re: WS-Emperor naked?
• Previous by thread: Re: WS-Emperor naked?
• Next by thread: Re: WS-Emperor naked?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread