W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Abstract messages [Was: Multi-Party Binding Scenario]

From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 09:44:52 -0800
Message-ID: <3E8C7314.5020208@tibco.com>
To: Jim Webber <jim.webber@arjuna.com>
CC: public-ws-chor@w3.org

+1

I don't think I said anything different from this - IMO constructing an 
XML-based binding for something like ASN.1 is practically difficult, and 
even if it were possible to do this without relying on WSDL, such a 
binding would be out of scope for this WG. I think there is still some 
support for preserving this as a possibility, but I don't personally 
favor that view. Even exotic message formats can in principle be 
transformed to XML - and doing so is easier IMO than trying to deal with 
them somehow in their original form.

How tightly tied WSDL is to the choreography definition can still be 
discussed, e.g. whether it is directly embedded or indirectly 
referenced, and if the latter, how much and what kind of indirection is 
desirable.

--Jon

Jim Webber wrote:
> Jon, Tony,
> 
> Furthermore given the name (and charter?) of this group I would suggest that
> tying its work to Web services (and perhaps the work of the WSAG) would be
> the most sensible thing to do. While the notion of an abstract and bindable
> choreography standard does have a certain undeniable appeal, I think this
> group should really stick to a specific "binding" if you like (and XML
> Schema plus WSDL works for me because you can extend it nicely), and that
> should be for Web services (pick the definition that best suits you, but I
> guess things like ASN.1 are out of scope).
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2003 12:45:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:58 UTC