----- Original Message ----- From: "Anne Thomas Manes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 14:27 Subject: RE: UTF-16 with Axis
> I realize that Axis doesn't currently conform to WS-I Basic Profile, but I > would think that there'd be some consensus that it would be a "good thing" > to consider making it happen. Given that IBM, Macromedia, and Borland all > participate in WS-I, and they all use Axis within their products, I'd expect > that they'll push to make it happen. does borland use axis, I never knew > WS-I is the only formal organization that is attemption to ensure > interoperability for the current round of Web services specs (SOAP 1.1, WSDL > 1.1, UDDI 2.0). well, I'd say soapbuilders is more useful there. ws-i is trying to lay down architectural stuff : 'you will only use doc/lit', 'you will not use SwA, you will use DIME'. So axis is a long way from the fundamental compliance. > Only UDDI 2.0 will ever achieve the status of an official > standard (via OASIS). W3C isn't doing anything around these specs. W3C is > developing SOAP 1.2 and WSDL 1.2. SOAP 1.2 might be finished by Q1 next > year. WSDL 1.2 won't be finished until Q4 next year (if they maintain their > current schedule). So if interoperability is an important goal within the > next 12-18 months, WS-I Basic Profile is the only way to go. see http://iseran.com/Steve/papers/interop for my stance. 18 months? WS-I? maybe. 6-12: soapbuilders. Now: you. > (And by the way, W3C is not an official international de jure standards > organization. It's just a consortium of vendors that work together to > develop specifications using a process governed by the bylaws of the > consortium. WS-I is also a consortium of vendors that work together to > develop specifications using a process governed by the bylaws of the > consortium. I don't really see much difference. I've participated in > standards development at W3C, OASIS, UDDI, and WS-I. Each consortium has > slightly different bylaws, but for the most part, the process is the same.) Well, W3C has more of a stance of taking architectural rather than political decisions. Though they did give the world XML Schema...
