Web Things, by Mark Baker

XBL – if you don’t know what it is, you will soon … well, maybe next year.
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]

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]

So after many weeks looking for a job, including a rather frantic last few days where I received three (!) cold calls, I’m happy to report that I’ve accepted a full time position as “Standards Manager” at RIM, aka Research in Motion, purveyors of high quality addictive substances.

This gets me back into mobile, after taking a bit of a break when I left – in 2003 – the mobile company I co-founded. It also means I’ll get to continue to work at the W3C, which I’m very happy about, especially as it seems to have found some new life in the work on Web Apps.

“Familiar with up-to-date Web technology, in particular with respect to Web Protocols and services on the Web”. Interesting; “services on the Web”
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]

I think Jorgen misses part of the point of the team comment for WS-Transfer, when he writes;

The W3C Staff comments on WS-Transfer make interesting reading – and really summarize what WS-Transfer is all about: […] WS-Transfer does not have all the features of HTTP regarding the manipulation of representations, such as caching, or content and language negotiation. However, the extensibility of SOAP would allow to add such capabilities incrementally, and it can benefit from the use of existing SOAP extensions such as WS-Security for security, or WS-Reliability or WS-Reliable Messaging for reliability.

How can it be a good thing, that all those features were lost and replaced with … wait for it … merely the opportunity to add them back in the future?! Do these folks realize the amount of money that’s been spent optimizing and deploying the Web, CDNs, and caching infrastructure in general? You think people are eager to redeploy all that? And for what, angle brackets?

Egads. Whether you believe in my position on Web services or not, hopefully you can at least appreciate that reuse and not reinvention is in everybody’s best interest. The authors of WS-Transfer clearly don’t. There’s even better ways to use SOAP for data transfer, ferchrisakes!

I’m calling bullshit on WS-Transfer. Please join me.

P.S. here’s some previous thoughts on this mess, before the W3C submission, when I was obviously in a much more agreeable mood. I guess I’m pissed off at the W3C for missing yet another opportunity to set these wayward soles straight.

Update; Thanks, Simon. Go, Mark. Even Rob can’t help himself. Kudos, Stefan.

Tags: soap, rest, web, webservices.

W3C to demonstrate how to break the Web. Say it ain’t so, Yves/Hugo/Eric/Phillipe! 8-(
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]

“Generally, it would also be a shame if the W3C — an organisation dedicated to “Leading the Web to its full potential” — were to Recommend something so unsuited to the Web” Mark reveals his true colours, ow! You go, girl!
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]

Ouch!
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]

A very good move for the W3C
(link) [del.icio.us/distobj]