[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group)
|
From: |
John |
|
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group) |
|
Date: |
Fri, 08 Feb 2002 16:39:55 -0600 |
Bill Lance wrote:
> Do you think we need an alternative to UDDI, or to
> centralized discovery service using it?
Possibly both. The description language seems to be built to the
assumption of a centralized registry. My preference: decentralize the
directory, leave the language be. If, however, the language assumptions
prevent discovery decentralization, then one must modify the UDDI
language. That make sense?
John Le'Brecage
- [DotGNU]Sun likely to join Web services group, Bill Lance, 2002/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]Sun likely to join Web services group, Norbert Bollow, 2002/02/07
- Re: [DotGNU]Sun likely to join Web services group, Bill Lance, 2002/02/07
- [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group), John, 2002/02/08
- Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group), Bill Lance, 2002/02/08
- Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group),
John <=
- Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group), Bill Lance, 2002/02/08
- Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot - (was: Sun likely to join Web services group), Gopal.V, 2002/02/09
- Re: [DotGNU]Our blindspot, Chris Smith, 2002/02/11
- [DotGNU]Ditsributed server (was Re: Our blindspot), Norbert Bollow, 2002/02/11
- [DotGNU]Re: Ditsributed server (was Re: Our blindspot), Chris Smith, 2002/02/11
- [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), Norbert Bollow, 2002/02/09
- [DotGNU]Re: UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), S11001001, 2002/02/13
- Re: [DotGNU]UDDI (was Re: Our blindspot), John, 2002/02/13