
|

|

|

|

 |
| Tech Update |
 |
Was Sun nudged to the sidelines?
Benchmark for leadership
By David Berlind
April 2, 2002


[an error occurred while processing this directive] |
There's virtually no evidence to suggest that Sun had failed to embrace at least three of the four Web services protocols--XML, UDDI, and SOAP. If the lists of initial backers are the proof points, the only controversy concerns the remaining protocol--WSDL. As it turns out, the list of the nine WS-I board members--Accenture, BEA, Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Intel, Oracle, and SAP, reads like a who's who of those that initially backed the W3C WSDL submission. All except for Accenture.
| [an error occurred while processing this directive] |
If Sutor and Charney were using the list of UDDI, WSDL, and SOAP backers as a benchmark for Web services leadership and therefore invitations to be founding members of the WS-I, that doesn't explain why Accenture--one of the nine WS-I board members--rose to the top and Sun didn't. Like Sun, Accenture (then Andersen Consulting) was one of the original 36 backers of the UDDI Project. Also like Sun, it doesn't appear as an initial backer of WSDL or SOAP. Likewise, four of the six remaining companies that received invitations to be board members--HP, Intel, and Oracle--also appear on only one of the three lists: The initial list of WSDL backers. In fact, if initial support for UDDI, WSDL, and SOAP were the criteria used to decide who would be WS-I board members and who wouldn't, then Ariba and CommerceOne are mysteriously absent as board members. In addition to IBM, Microsoft, and SAP--three of the nine WS-I board members--Ariba and CommerceOne are the only companies that appear on all three lists. Neither received an invitation to be a WS-I board member.
While Sun executives won't speculate on the criteria used to select WS-I board members, they're quick to point out that Sun is extremely active in all aspects of Web services. In addition to Sun's demonstrated involvement in XML and UDDI, Sun's chief technology evangelist Simon Phipps said that Sun has also been in the thick of SOAP and WSDL. According to Phipps, "The record speaks for itself. Sun was present the first day it was publicly possible for us to join the W3C's working groups in support of the SOAP and WSDL protocols." While the minutes of those meetings are tucked away behind a members-only section of the W3C's Web site, another page demonstrating Sun's involvement in Web services isn't. According to the W3C's Web Services Architecture Working Group roster, a Sun employee--Chris Ferris--is as close to the top of the list as a participant can get: He's the chairperson.
Microsoft's Charney cautioned against relying on single litmus test such as who was on what list. For example, Charney criticized Sun's absence from one of the industry's first Web services interoperability events as an indicator of Sun's unwillingness to work with the rest of the industry. Citing conflicting commitments, Sun officials acknowledged that they missed the event but said the company will be present at all future interoperability bake-offs. According to Charney, "We looked for people seeking alignment around Web services and we wanted to keep it down to smaller group of compani es that had unique perspectives and were complementary to each other. Accenture, for example, already had significant efforts underway to help its customers deploy Web services."
What do you think so far? Is the WS-I a power play? Should Sun have a seat on the board, or should it join as a contributor? Or, do you have that elusive piece to complete the puzzle? Let David know what's on your mind by writing to him at david.berlind@cnet.com. Read "IBM's unfolding power play," where David points out that there could there be more to the WS-I's history than meets the eye.
![]() |
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive] |
![]() |
 |
![]() |
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

|

|

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]


|

|

|

|