The way this is done in most XML and Web Services related standards is that
both groups work together and produce a "shared" module. This module in
turn is part of both the WSRP and WSIA deliverables.
Best regards,
Angel
Angel Luis Diaz, Ph.D
Senior Manager, Next Generation eXperience Frameworks
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
aldiaz@us.ibm.com
(914) 784-7388 / (914) 441-7594
Greg Giles <ggiles@cisco.com> on 03/13/2002 08:38:23 PM
To: Eilon Reshef <eilon.reshef@webcollage.com>, Wsia
<wsia@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc:
Subject: RE: [wsia] Questions around Relationship between WSIA and WSRP
Eilon, great update, thanks.�Your note about ownership�of the common
'base' concerns me, since with such passionate groups of people involved
it may be difficult to resolve. With that in mind I thought it would be
useful to explore some less attractive options beyond the obvious, so that
any negotiations don't simply end in stalemate. Here are a couple that
jumped out at me:
- set up a third committee that has ownership of the 'base' services
-- pros
--- clear ownership, agenda and scope
-- cons
--- dependency will slow down other efforts
-�have a core set of people spanning both committees and having the base
divided between them, each dual member would lead a team within a single
committee to deliver
-- pros
--- everyone feels heard
--- good cross-pollination of concepts
-- cons
--- assumes a rigorous execution process
--- heavy time commitment
Regards
Greg
-----Original Message-----
From: Eilon Reshef [mailto:eilon.reshef@webcollage.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:14 PM
To: ; wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsia] Questions around Relationship between WSIA and WSRP
Hi Everybody,
Since the initial meeting of the OASIS WSRP committee is next week, I
wanted to bring up to discussion the relationship between the WSIA
committee and the WSRP committee. Naturally, this will be part of the
discussions next week and since there is a significant overlap between the
individuals attending both committees, this will probably be an interesting
discussion. Yet, I thought it might help to bring up some the questions
ahead of time, so that by the time we all meet�we will have had some time
to�come up with an opinion.
The stated goals of the two committees are:
WSIA. Create an XML and web services centric framework for interactive web
applications. The designs must achieve two main goals: enable businesses
to distribute web applications through multiple revenue channels, and
enable new services or applications to be created by leveraging existing
applications across the Web.
WSRP. Create an XML and web services standard that will allow for the
'plug-n-play' of: portals, other intermediary web applications that
aggregate content, and applications from disparate sources. These
so-called Remote Portlet Web services will be designed to enable
businesses to provide content or applications in a form that does not
require any manual content or application-specific adaptation by consuming
applications.
Clearly, in both cases the goal is to facilitate integration of
interactive applications (or: components) into new contexts. In WSIA, the
"Consumer" applications are generic, whereas in WSRP, they are
specifically portal applications.
Based on the preliminary work in both committees, there's a set of base
services common to both cases, which handles the fundamental questions of
how are interactive applications represented and integrated.
�������� +----------+
�������� +�� Base���+
�������� +----------+
And then some application-specific interfaces/protocols, which deal with
portal integration (e.g., admin screens and user management) and
non-portal integration (customization, commerce integration, etc.).
+-------------+ +-----------------+
+���Portals�� + +���Non-portals�� +
+-------------+ +-----------------+
Naturally, we will have to decide - between the two committees - which one
handles the "base" services. These are naturally issues around the basic
request model (actual API and flow), URL rewriting, instantiation, etc.
It would seem that WSRP will evolve from this into portal-specific
questions and WSIA will evolve into tighter integration scenarios.
There are pros and cons to having each committee handle the base services:
- WSRP is a more advanced in terms of actual protocols for base services.
(But, naturally, those protocols may not less adequate for the general
case)
- WSIA has a wider view of the requirements. (But, naturally, may require
some more time to converge).
Again, since there's a large overlap between the two committees, this is
more of a procedural issue than it is of a real issue, but I thought it
might be worth pointing out before the meeting.
Looking forward to see you on Monday,
Eilon
PS: Sorry if this message gets to you twice - I posted it to both
committees.