1. Open Source forInteroperability Paul Fremantle VP, Apache Synapse Member, ASF CTO and Co-Founder, WSO2

2. Why am I talking about this? Co-Chair, OASIS WSRX TC Some of my most read blog entries: http://pzf.fremantle.org/2008/05/open-source-versus-open-standards.html http://pzf.fremantle.org/2008/05/why-open-standards-and-interoperability.html Incubator project – Stonehenge

3. Specification Standard

4. Specifications Anyone can write a spec The aim of a spec is technical not political A good spec should say just enough: Too much and it becomes restrictive Too little and it cannot be implemented interoperably

5. Standards What makes a standard?

7. Standard “Authoritative or recognized exemplar of quality or correctness” (1477)

9. A circular definition What makes a standard is a standard’s body!

10. Neutrality

12. Two types of Openness Openness to join the standards body Openness of the specifications

13. Open to join?

15. Apache and RF This is a significant issue when Apache looks at projects The good news is a big push towards OPEN Standards e.g. OASIS and W3C Royalty Free initiatives Microsoft Open Specification Promise etc

17. Governance

18. Process

19. API

21. ABI

22. Interoperability is more than just Standards

23. PAM

24. Why do companies participate in Standards?

26. Standards provide a forum for competitors to co-operate

27. What is the reality of standards bodies?

29. Standards committees are rarely about unfettered co-operation

30. Standards bodies and interoperability Companies don’t like publishing results until everything works Testing is not the main aim of the standards team members The focus of a standards committee is often about trying to get the most advantage for your company

32. Open Source

33. Open Source is not just Code

34. The same principles apply Fairness and Openness to participate Governance Openness of interactions “Open Development”

35. So what’s the Difference between Open Standards and Open Source?

36. Open Source

37. Open Source provides a forum for real collaboration

38. Stonehenge

39. Open Source approach to Interoperability Incubator project Interoperability for WS-* SOAP, MTOM, WS-Addressing, WS-Sec, WS-RM, etc Started in December 2008 Contributors from Microsoft, WSO2, Redhat/JBoss, Progress/IONA, Eviware Interest from Sun/Metro Based around an existing effort to define an interoperable application “StockTrader”

40. StockTrader

41. Stonehenge basics Website: http://incubator.apache.org/stonehenge SVN: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/stonehenge/trunk/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/stonehenge/trunk/stocktrader/ Mailing List: Stonehenge-dev@incubator.apache.org

42. Getting involved Do you have experience of a WS-* stack? Aiming to release M1 milestone release this month M2 will add distributed identity Would you like to improve our website? Would you just like to see sample interoperable code?

43. Challenges with doing this @ Apache Does Apache do interop? Not yet, but this isn’t the only example http://incubator.apache.org/olio/ Do OSS developers want to write interop apps? Yes, some of them! Is Apache better than setting up a new organization or going to SourceForge? Definitely

44. Alternatives? WS-I Words (profiles) not Action (code) Profiles are useful but have been too slow to emerge I’m guessing its bogged down in politics No open discussion so its hard to say WSTF Emerged about the same time as Stonehenge Running endpoints vs Code Default behaviour: closed until a vote to open

45. How does Stonehenge fit with the previous discussion? Testing ABIs not APIs Using Apache governance model Meritocracy Neutrality (between vendors) Open access to contribute or just lurk Royalty Free approach NO GAMING The code can be directly copied to help get started Designed to encourage co-operation not competition

46. Questions?