I sent this to the service-orientated-architecture list this morning Thought it might be useful to replicate here (slightly edited) …

Try looking at it this way; a transfer protocol is to a transport protocol, as a supplier agreement is to a delivery truck. That is, transport only gets the goods to the door, while the agreement gets them in the door.

Everybody’s favourite WS-Whipping-Boy, is now a Rec. Yay! 8-(

Let’s just hope that if you’re using it, you’re making the same undocumented assumption as those who developed the spec. Unlike Henry Thompson.

I’m also reminded, unfortunately, of something from the W3C Process document;

W3C recommends the wide deployment of its Recommendations.

Sigh. The W3C needs the equivalent of an IETF “Experimental” label, me thinks. Or perhaps a whole new track, perhaps called “Stuff that Members want to work on because they don’t understand the Web”. 8-)

Update; Micah also sighs. And Anne likes my track idea.

Tags: soap, enterprisey, webservices.

If you’re a W3C AC rep, please answer this survey. If you’re not, please encourage your AC rep to answer it. Member-
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]
At least that’s how I read the title 8-)
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]
“Barnes says that if Bonds’ balls aren’t authenticated by Major League Baseball, collectors and auction houses will have to go back to the old way of determining ownership” Erm… nevermind 8-)
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]