axis-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran" <>
Subject Re: Document style web services
Date Sat, 23 Nov 2002 18:54:18 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pae Choi" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 00:32
Subject: Re: Document style web services

> And that's true ebXML has own stuff all that you mentined.
> Shouldn't those considered as positive artifacts. They have finer
> refinements than the combination you mentioned. Also, WSDL
> is only a "Note" and UDDI did not even considered the WSDL
> adoption until the recent release. And those are mainly happened
> IBM/MS marrage. I don't think the UDDI is even came to the door
> at W3C.

Yes, there is nothing in ebXML that is particularly bad, just like there is
a lot in Corba that we shouldnt forget about in our rush to use XML
everywere down the stack. If there is a weakness in ebXML it is focused on
B2B comms, a kind of XML/TCP alternative to EDI. Whereas SOAP works nicely
as a behind the firewall means of gluing stuff together. Most of the SOAP
stuff I know about is taking place in that area, as it lets people get comfy
with a technology before opening up your services to the rest of the world.

> Also, if SOAP/WSDL/UDDI is a such perfect combination, why W3C
> is working on a new Working Group for Choreography even though
> we have many of those from different suggestions led by some
> vendors or marriage of some among them. To wit, the current work
> and the related artificats at W3C are not even sufficient Web services.

W3C has a bit of a dilemma wth web services, to wit they arent that
web-centric. For example SOAP over BEEP could be a better transport.
Similarly, the w3c's fascination with RDF makes them view web services with
a bit of disdain. Even XML was only meant to be a transient data
representation syntax on the way to knowledge representation.

> All these things are just part of transition toward the better
> collaborative solution. In that transition, the combination of SOAP/
> WSDL/UDDI should not be consider only way to stick around. For
> example, AFAIK, the asian community adopted ebXML more than
> the combination you mentioned and they are already in practice
> in the real world. Because ebXML is a formal standard in the
> international community. the combination you mentioned is not
> even US standard.

Maybe its like the phones: mandating something like GSM gives an interop
advantage, even if alternate technologies are 'superior' in their own little

As an aside, does *anyone* use UDDI?


View raw message