[wsrp] RE: [wsia] Questions around Relationship between WSIA and WSRP

[Angel Luis Diaz <aldiaz@us.ibm.com>]

FYI

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
---------------------- Forwarded by Angel Luis Diaz/Watson/IBM on
03/14/2002 10:29 AM ---------------------------

Angel Luis Diaz
03/14/2002 08:11 AM

To:    Greg Giles <ggiles@cisco.com>
cc:    wsia@lists.oasis-open.org
From:  Angel Luis Diaz/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
Subject:    RE: [wsia] Questions around Relationship between WSIA and WSRP
       (Document link: Angel Luis Diaz)


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.