SAP Position Paper
Web Service Workshop, W3C
April 11/12, 2001, San Jose, CA -USA


As a member of the W3C, SAP believes that XML-based data exchange will
be the key technology for application integration within and between
enterprises.

XML Protocol  (XMLP) is a promising starting point that has the
potential to be the solid base of such a communication infrastructure.
Due to its modularized approach, XMLP will be easily extensible to meet
further requirements. Some of the extensions that SAP would prioritize
are security, web transactions, reliable messaging and asynchronous RPC.
To guarantee interoperability such basic extensions should be
standardized by the W3C.

It is critical that XMLP has to be embedded within a more comprehensive
environment to achieve interoperability. Such an environment has to
provide technologies to describe communication end points (Web Services)
and the messages accepted by those endpoints. These service descriptions
should provide a mechanism to refer to standard extension concepts
registered in a W3C extension repository. The definition of such
extensions comprises their syntax and semantics.

Such technologies already have been investigated by several other
companies, groups, and organizations. But as we have seen during the
convergence of the ebXML Transport, Routing and Packaging (ebXML TRP)
and SOAP 1.1 with Attachments, the W3C is a forum that can harmonize
different approaches. Such gathered momentum should continue.

To summarize, SAP would like to see the W3C starting activities in the
following areas:

1. Standardized extensions of XMLP (XMLP modules) e.g. security, web
transactions, reliable messaging and asynchronous RPC.
2. Definition of a description language for Web Services that covers
XMLP extensions. WSDL 1.1 as submitted to the W3C would be our preferred
approach.

Because these topics are closely related and time critical we could
imagine two models how to proceed. First, one working group for each
topic and a coordination group that also handles the liaisons with the
involved external organizations. Second, establishing one group that
covers all topics. It is best practice for working groups to split into
subgroups. If the W3C decides to establish one group for all issues,
then this practice should be explicitly defined and mentioned within the
WG charter.

SAP, Walldorf, Germany, March 12, 2001