ws-dd message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-dd] Building a DPWS online community
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: Toby Nixon <Toby.Nixon@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 19:10:20 -0500
Toby,
Upon reading this I couldn't
help but think that just about everything you've mentioned here could just
as easily apply to any WS spec or profile - so I'm not sure a DPWS-specific
thing is the right answer because it could lead to lots of these popping
up and confusing (or even scaring :-) people. In order for any site
to keep people's interest there needs to be a reason for them to come back
- beyond the initial curiosity. To me, one of the big reasons for
people's continued interest in a profile would be due to their actual usage
of it - and in particular its use in customer-driven scenarios. An
environment where people (ie. customers) can express their requirements
and then vendors/implementations can demonstrate how they successfully
meet those needs in an interoperable fashion, and provide guidance to those
customers on how to successfully do the same deployments themselves 'in-house'
would be something that, IMO, would keep people coming back for more. Often
we find that interop issues are not due to bugs in the vendors code, but
rather there was confusion on how to configure the various products "just
right" for the certain use-case. Having a place were customers
can see proof of interop along with sample code and configuration details
would go a long way towards jump-starting them to reproducing these scenarios
themselves.
In this light, I think the WSDD
members should consider looking at the Web Services Test Forum ( http://www.wstf.org
). I provides many of the things you've talked about and the things
I've mentioned (like a place to demonstrate real on-going interoperability
testing - rather than just point-in-time interop). Its a free org
so that vendors, ISV and customers of all sizes can easily join. One
of the other things that it can provide is provide a place where the entire
WS community can share ideas about how several specs and profiles can be
used together - something a profile specific site might not encourage as
easily.
Anyway, I'd be happy to share more info
about it if people are interested.
thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com
Toby Nixon <Toby.Nixon@microsoft.com>
12/03/2008 07:50 PM
|
To
| "ws-dd@lists.oasis-open.org"
<ws-dd@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [ws-dd] Building a DPWS online community |
|
Issues 25 and 57 raised the need for a discoverable
mechanism to associate DPWS device and service types. I suggested that
this be expanded into discussion of the need for broader support for the
DPWS implementer community. I'd like to share some thoughts about this.
As you know, no new standards organization
has been created to "own" DPWS or be devoted to developing device
or service specifications that reference it. DPWS started out as a proposal
for a second-generation UPnP Device Architecture, and if that path had
been pursued to its conclusion, UPnP Forum would have provided the infrastructure
for DCP development, ongoing interop events, device certification, cooperative
marketing, and a community peer-support network. While it's still possible
UPnP Forum may reference DPWS at some point in the future, UPnP will not
be the only organization that references DPWS; a number of other organizations
and market segments for network-connected devices are interested in referencing
DPWS, particularly once it is standardized. Each of these organizations
would likely provide their own IPR policies and committee structure for
schema development, interops, certification programs, marketing, etc. The
current standardization activity for DPWS in OASIS will not continue indefinitely;
the charter calls for WS-DD to exist only long enough to complete its current
work. While another OASIS TC (or continuation of WS-DD) could be chartered
for a subsequent version of DPWS if needed, WS-DD and OASIS will not be
the appropriate focus of an ongoing community around DPWS for activities
not directly related to standardization. Some vendors may provide information
about DPWS in the context of their products (such as Microsoft, with MSDN,
for example), but the DPWS community will be broader than any one vendor
or organization.
So, what should be the coordination point
and place for sharing information about DPWS amongst the various organizations
that will be basing work on it? What kind of things should this DPWS community
provide? Here are a few things that come to mind (some already mentioned
before):
· A
registry of known DPWS device and service types and links to their specs
(as mentioned in issues 25 and 57)
· Links
to the most recent versions of DPWS and the specs it references (like the
RDDL pages)
· Links
to organizations that have based work on DPWS or that have certification
programs for DPWS-based devices (particular to help avoid duplicative work)
· Links
to known research projects based on DPWS
· Links
to information on known DPWS-based commercial products (even if they’re
not “certified” in any way)
· Links
to known DPWS protocol stacks, device and service implementations, and
development and test tools, both commercial and open source
· Links
to or downloads of white papers, Powerpoint presentations, and tutorial
information about DPWS that can be used by anyone who needs to make a presentation
or sell an idea
· A
blog for posting of news about DPWS standards and products, with open comments
· An
email list, newsgroup, or open blog for community-based support for DPWS
implementers
o to
get answers to DPWS technical questions
o to
socialize ideas for new DPWS device classes and extensions before selecting
appropriate venues for further work (although we have to be careful not
to get into actual IPR contributions or standards development)
o to
collaborate on evangelism and marketing efforts, such as joining forces
to make presentations at trade shows or to newly-targeted vertical opportunities
I’m sure you can think of other things that
could be included.
Much of this information could be collected
on a "Wiki" basis – voluntary contributions by the DPWS community,
rather than having any permanent, paid staff. In fact, the DPWS page on
Wikipedia would be a decent starting point, although that page would not
itself be the right venue for an ongoing web presence. It appears that
domain names like dpws.com and dpws.net are not actively
being used (somebody owns them, but they’re probably available), so maybe
we could acquire one of those for the purpose. Somebody would have to host
the site, but it shouldn’t be very expensive or complicated.
This mechanism wouldn’t create a venue –
either physical or legal – for collaborative work on service schemas or
spec extensions (such as, for example, power management) or any kind of
certification program. Historically, it's worked best for new specs to
be developed by a group of companies who have a commercial interest, and
then brought into an established standards organization such as OASIS (or
another existing org that works in that area). In the current economic
climate, few of us likely have the time or budget to join yet another
ongoing standards organization like a “DPWS Forum”. OASIS is a fine venue
to use when standardizing XML-based specs that have no other obvious home;
the OASIS staff has no agenda or overarching vision, the IPR policy is
straightforward and pragmatic, the processes are not cumbersome, the infrastructure
is usable, they’re pretty well known and well respected in industry and
government circles, they have good relationships with de jure organizations
to which specs can be advanced if desired, and it’s relatively cheap compared
to other places the work could be done. But there are others, and those
have an interest in a particular spec should take it where they feel most
comfortable rather than feeling constrained to do the work in a specific
place.
As for certification, I don’t know if it
makes sense to have a broad certification for DPWS compliance in isolation
from any specific device or service type. In most cases, certification
would come from the vertical org that publishes the schema for a particular
class. We can talk further about what makes sense as a certification or
logo vehicle for device classes that don’t have some org supporting them,
if indeed it is needed at all.
So -- do you think it’s practical to get
a simple Wiki/blog-type collaboration site set up and run without a large
ongoing investment of money or time? We may be able to find someone willing
to host the service at no cost in exchange for potential ad revenue or
just as a contribution to the community. Would people be willing to contribute
material for it? Or do you think more formal structure would be needed,
with dues and staff and all those things?
Toby Nixon | Senior
Standards Program Manager | Windows Device and Storage Technologies
| Microsoft Corporation
toby.nixon@microsoft.com
| www.microsoft.com
| V: +1 425 706 2792 | M: +1 206 790 6377 | F:
+1 425 708 4811
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]