W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > November 2004

RE: i0001: EPRs as identifiers (why XML?)

From: Vinoski, Stephen <Steve.Vinoski@iona.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:04:21 -0500
Message-ID: <13AC4E67178F4D4EA31BB1BA645303133D5300@amereast-ems2.boston.amer.iona.com>
To: "Jim Webber" <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>
Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

WSDL is designed for extensibility and allows for multiple bindings. It can be
used to provide a service contract language that's independent of the
underlying protocol, transport, and transfer syntax. We successfully use this
extensibility in production today with a number of customers. Whether you like
the fact that WSDL is extensible is neither here nor there -- it's in the spec.

Why should WS-Addressing take it upon itself to undo the abstractions provided
by the existing WSDL specification by supporting only a single protocol?

You also seem to assume that a service is reachable over only a single protocol.
Why?

--steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Webber [mailto:Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk]
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 6:23 PM
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: RE: i0001: EPRs as identifiers (why XML?)



Paco:

I'm having difficutly in understanding how WS-Addressing is useful at
all to anything other than SOAP. 

[ SOAP Payload ] == message, transfer mechanism TBD

[ SOAP Payload + WS-Address ] == message ready to go on some underlying
network protocol

Versus say:

[ CORBA payload + IIOP info ] == message ready to go via TCP

Or

[ XML payload + HTTP headers] == message ready to go via HTTP

So I see that other transfer protocols have addressing information as
part of their unit of transfer by default. SOAP doesn't have that, hence
the need for a SOAP-friendly addressing mechanism. So I am a little
puzzled as to how WS-Addressing is useful outside the SOAP domain. Can
you exemplify something from your experience to help?

As for WSDL being so "flexible," well that sure goes some way to
explaining how complex it is. Had WSDL gone down the route of describing
SOAP message exchanges, then I don't think we would have all be
thoroughly entertained by Rich's recent article. Perhaps Rich will
commit to a similar article on WS-Addressing if it becomes all-embracing
rather than focussed and useful :-)

Jim
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 23:04:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:59 GMT