[DAS] Re: [Call to action] Retrieval of positions from feature identifiers

[Brian Gilman]

yep you got it. It's all CORBA but no one likes the word so lets call it
web services and make everyone love it.

			-b

-----------------------
Brian Gilman <gilmanb@genome.wi.mit.edu>
Sr. Software Engineer MIT/Whitehead Inst. Center for Genome Research
One Kendall Square, Bldg. 300 / Cambridge, MA 02139-1561 USA
phone +1 617  252 1069 / fax +1 617 252 1902


On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Ewan Birney wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Brian Gilman wrote:
> 
> > I totally agree with Mathew on this one. Each "Business Entity" can be
> > easy mapped to into this domain. Why reinvent the wheel?? Our group will
> > be deploying a UDDI server for people to play with. I think this will
> > allow us to get our head wrapped around UDDI and how it fits in the web
> > services architecture. 
> 
> 40 SOAP messages to do discovery?
> 
> 
> (I have to admit, all this SOAP/UDDI whatever stuff *is just badly written
> CORBA* Jeez. People want a Trading service right from CORBA terms?)
> 
> 
> > 
> > 				Best, 
> > 
> > 					-brian
> > 
> > -----------------------
> > Brian Gilman <gilmanb@genome.wi.mit.edu>
> > Sr. Software Engineer MIT/Whitehead Inst. Center for Genome Research
> > One Kendall Square, Bldg. 300 / Cambridge, MA 02139-1561 USA
> > phone +1 617  252 1069 / fax +1 617 252 1902
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Matthew Pocock wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Lincoln, still some questions...
> > > 
> > > > On the subject of UDDI, I've read through the specs, but the language
> > > > that they use "business contacts", "access points", "businessEntity",
> > > > "businessKey" is totally business oriented.  There is certainly a lot
> > > > that we can borrow from the specification, but to implement the 40
> > > > SOAP messages required by a fully compliant UDDI registry is not only
> > > > overkill, but most of the messages are irrelevant to what we want to
> > > > do.
> > > > 
> > > > Lincoln
> > > > 	
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Why is bioinformatics so special that we need to invent something 
> > > ourself from scratch? We haven't written our own DNS, and SQL databases 
> > > are starting to be used widely. The UDDI specs do use business words a 
> > > lot in the spec, but they have obvious mappings to things like research 
> > > institutes and services we want to publicise. I doubt anybody writing a 
> > > DAS server will implement a UDDI registry - why not just register with 
> > > IBM, Microsoft or one of the other free registration services? If most 
> > > messages are irrelevant, then we won't need to use them. There are uddi 
> > > client libraries for several languages, so DAS client and server 
> > > implementations probably just need to link against one of these to be 
> > > uddi-tastic. Plus, if we use a public service like this, then we have a 
> > > much better chance of getting a high-availability service.
> > > 
> > > Just to be clear, I have no personal attachment to UDDI, but it is as I 
> > > understand it the industry standard and globaly accessible method for 
> > > publishing SOAP services, and that is the itch we're trying to scratch. 
> > > If something else is, then we should use that instead.
> > > 
> > > Matthew
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > DAS mailing list
> > > DAS@biodas.org
> > > http://biodas.org/mailman/listinfo/das
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > DAS mailing list
> > DAS@biodas.org
> > http://biodas.org/mailman/listinfo/das
> > 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Ewan Birney. Mobile: +44 (0)7970 151230, Work: +44 1223 494420
> <birney@ebi.ac.uk>. 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>