ws-soap-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From George I Matkovits <>
Subject Re: Defining a SOAP Application Schema
Date Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:09:55 GMT
I am afraid you are correct in your prediction. The Microsoft version is going
to be completely COM-to-COM. The IBM (apache) version is going to be
Java-to-Java. How are we going to have some interoperability ?

James Snell wrote:

> Perhaps, but right now, I wouldn't be able to say one way or the other.
> Personally, I need these things discussed now and figured out soon, very
> soon, which is why I've always been so active in this arena.  I don't see
> the W3C playing a significant role in the development of SOAP at any point
> in the near future.  The primary players at this point are IBM and
> Microsoft.  Now, before the people at the other companies who worked on the
> SOAP spec start yellin', allow to me to say this:  IBM and MS have taken the
> driver seat with SOAP, there is no doubt about it, yes others have been
> involved, but most of the innovation in this area has come from these two
> companies -- Microsoft more so than IBM (also, most of the credibility
> behind SOAP has come from these two companies).  SOAP is, and will continue
> to be, developed independently of the W3C.  This, however, does not make it
> of any less importance to get SOME Internet standards body to gives its
> "OK".  To me, the W3C makes the most sense, especially in the area of
> Service Description, since what we're talking about is Metadata (in the same
> category as RDF and XML Schema).  SOAP, on the other hand, could go either
> way since it is both a method of transporting data and a method of packaging
> content.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Brennan []
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 6:03 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: Defining a SOAP Application Schema
> > From: James Snell []
> >
> > I don't see service description ever becoming a part of the SOAP spec.
> > Rather, the different parties involved would like to see a separate
> > specification (one that covers more than just SOAP) defined
> > and supported by
> > the industry and submitted to the W3C.
> I like that approach. Seems like it makes sense to me. However, I wonder, at
> times, if the W3C is the right body to look toward to move SOAP toward an
> official status. They seem to be gridlocked, lately, with controversy
> surrounding the schema spec and debates over URI/namespace issues. They just
> kicked XML packaging back out to the public effectively saying they have
> their hands full and won't be able to address the issue. Can they
> realistically be expected to address the issue of web services in a timely
> manner?
> It seems to me that if the parties currently involved in shaping the SOAP
> spec can arrive at a consensus, then maybe when they are done it should be
> submitted to some other body that might be able to move more quickly.

View raw message