Comments on: WS-Transfer, WS-ResourceTransfer, WS-Enumeration and WS-MetadataExchange on their way to W3C http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/217 IT management in a changing IT world Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:28:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Stu http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/217#comment-46169 Stu Sat, 28 Jun 2008 08:55:28 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=217#comment-46169 The audience of the talk was with Java developers that had not likely been exposed to the WS-Man / WS-RF side of things so the talk mostly just gave a brief intro of what they do. You can download a (poorly formatted!) version of the talk <a href="http://jazoon.com/jazoon08/en/conference/presentationdetails.html?type=sid&detail=5255" rel="nofollow">here</a>, though if you want a better version I can email it. (Come to think of it, I may also send one to the Jazoon folks) The audience of the talk was with Java developers that had not likely been exposed to the WS-Man / WS-RF side of things so the talk mostly just gave a brief intro of what they do. You can download a (poorly formatted!) version of the talk here, though if you want a better version I can email it. (Come to think of it, I may also send one to the Jazoon folks)

]]> By: William Vambenepe http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/217#comment-46166 William Vambenepe Fri, 27 Jun 2008 23:21:55 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=217#comment-46166 Right on Stu, in both paragraphs. In the short term, it looks like it's going to be WS-Managment versus of hodge-podge of XML messages that draw from the current WS-RT draft and at least one eventing spec (either WS-Notification or WS-Eventing). In the longer term, it looks like it's going to be the current WS-Management (not going away at this point) versus at least one WS-RT-based stack (that stack could be presented as a new version of WS-Management or not). I say "at least one" because seeing how little appetite there seems to be for practical compromise versus grandstanding, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with more than one effort to build management on top of WS-RT if/when (at this point it is not sure that W3C will accept it) WS-RT comes out. At this point I have stepped out of the train, but the wreck is almost as painful from the outside as from the inside. WRT to your second paragraph, I am very interested in your Jazoon talk. I didn't see anything about this on your blog since you <a href="http://www.stucharlton.com/blog/mt-search.cgi?search=jazoon&IncludeBlogs=3" rel="nofollow">announced </a>that you were going. Do you plan to publish content from your talk? If not, can I request the favor of an email? :-) I need to know more about your talk to be sure, but I think you are making a point similar to one I am currently developing in a blog draft. About the fact that the fragment-access and mutli-step-retrieval features don't have to be limited to a few operations ("another port type", as you say). That blog draft has been gathering dust, but now that WS-RT is back in the news and now that you bring that up I'll try to finish it over the weekend. Right on Stu, in both paragraphs.

In the short term, it looks like it’s going to be WS-Managment versus of hodge-podge of XML messages that draw from the current WS-RT draft and at least one eventing spec (either WS-Notification or WS-Eventing). In the longer term, it looks like it’s going to be the current WS-Management (not going away at this point) versus at least one WS-RT-based stack (that stack could be presented as a new version of WS-Management or not). I say “at least one” because seeing how little appetite there seems to be for practical compromise versus grandstanding, I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up with more than one effort to build management on top of WS-RT if/when (at this point it is not sure that W3C will accept it) WS-RT comes out. At this point I have stepped out of the train, but the wreck is almost as painful from the outside as from the inside.

WRT to your second paragraph, I am very interested in your Jazoon talk. I didn’t see anything about this on your blog since you announced that you were going. Do you plan to publish content from your talk? If not, can I request the favor of an email? :-)

I need to know more about your talk to be sure, but I think you are making a point similar to one I am currently developing in a blog draft. About the fact that the fragment-access and mutli-step-retrieval features don’t have to be limited to a few operations (”another port type”, as you say).

That blog draft has been gathering dust, but now that WS-RT is back in the news and now that you bring that up I’ll try to finish it over the weekend.

]]> By: Stu http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/217#comment-46165 Stu Fri, 27 Jun 2008 23:07:04 +0000 http://stage.vambenepe.com/?p=217#comment-46165 So, instead of two islands (WSDM vs. WS-Man) we will have.... two islands? (Microsoft's WS-Man vs. WS-Man with WS-ResourceTransfer)? The basic thing about these specs is that they're written as general purpose data access APIs. They're arguably usable as a data access layer for your web services, if only you could adapt your existing services over a bus or expose another port type out of your WSDL. (This observation is in the Jazoon '08 talk I gave this week). So, instead of two islands (WSDM vs. WS-Man) we will have…. two islands? (Microsoft’s WS-Man vs. WS-Man with WS-ResourceTransfer)?

The basic thing about these specs is that they’re written as general purpose data access APIs. They’re arguably usable as a data access layer for your web services, if only you could adapt your existing services over a bus or expose another port type out of your WSDL. (This observation is in the Jazoon ‘08 talk I gave this week).

]]>