UDDI and the Framework for Web Services Implementation Technical Committees close

Posted by Mark Little on Jul 02, 2008 03:16 AM

Community

SOA

Topics

Web Services

Tags

UDDI,

Standardization,

OASIS

OASIS just announced the closure of two technical committees: UDDI and OASIS Framework for Web Services Implementation (FWSI). In terms of UDDI:

The UDDI Specification TC standardized two versions (v2.0 and v3.0)
of the UDDI specification set, as well as a Schema Centric XML
Canonicalization Specification V1.0.   See:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tcspecs.htm#uddiv3
UDDI versions 2.0 and 3.0 were approved as OASIS Standards.  See:
http://www.oasis-open.org/news/oasis_news_02_03_05.php
and the TC's presentation "UDDI v3: The Registry Standard for SOA", at:
http://www.oasis-open.org/presentations/uddi_v3_webcast_20050222.pdf

The UDDI specification set and associated data models and schemas
provide the basic methods for publication and discovery of Web
services, both within and between enterprises.  These standards are
in wide use today, and serve as the cornerstone for standards-based
Web service registries and directories.

This isn't the end of UDDI development, as the OASIS announcement makes clear: it's still alive and well at the main UDDI site. OASIS announces the closer of technical committees all the time, but this may be different. In recent years the need for registries has grown but the adoption of UDDI has not. Although in the open source arena some ESBs use UDDI, others don't and have voiced doubts over its usefulness. Maybe moving out of OASIS (for now, or permanently is not clear) is not a problem for UDDI, since it has been dogged by these kinds of concerns since its birth. But the number of new users of UDDI does not seem to be keeping pace with the number of new users of registries.

As for FWSI, OASIS has this to say:

The FWSI TC produced two specifications, the FWSI Functional
Elements Specification v2.0, approved as a Committee Specification,
and the FWSI Web Service Implementation Methodology, approved as a
Public Review Draft.

The FWSI project sought to facilitate implementation of robust Web
services by defining a practical and extensible methodology
consisting of implementation processes, and common functional
elements, for high quality Web services systems.

Did FWSI have an impact on the industry? Certainly the technical committee produced a few documents and had a few meetings, but it was never heavily cross-referenced by vendors or other standards.

1. Back to top

   Let's build a new standard...

   Jul 2, 2008 4:45 PM by Dan Diephouse

   That's not built around SOAP/web services. See here for more info...

   Reply

2. Back to top

   Why UDDI is dead and future

   Jul 2, 2008 11:11 PM by Deepal Jayasinghe

   One of the reason I see with UDDI registry approach is its complexity. Now the trend is different people are building registry/repository on HTTP and APP , IMO which will be the future. Having said that there are two very good open source registry/repository products out there. Both of them did their releases in last few weeks.
   http://blogs.deepal.org

   Reply

3. Back to top

   Using an Registry/Repository to implement Governance based on OSS principle

   Jul 3, 2008 7:06 AM by Paul Fremantle

   I agree with Dan we need a new API based on AtomPub. If you want to read about how to use a new kind of OSS Registry to do SOA Governance, I've written about that in my blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org/2008/06/soa-governance-and-open-source.html

   Reply

4. Back to top

   Re: Using an Registry/Repository to implement Governance based on OSS princ

   Jul 3, 2008 7:06 AM by Paul Fremantle

   And with a proper link: http://pzf.fremantle.org/2008/06/soa-governance-and-open-source.html

   Reply

• Older >