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

I can extract two issues from this thread
1. should we use XML/WSDL or use/invent an abstraction layer above
2. What features of a language are required in order to be able to
define
abstract and concrete message types.

It is definitely worth separating these issues!

Martin.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-chor-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-chor-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jim Webber
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 8:55 AM
> To: jdart@tibco.com; 'Furniss Peter'
> Cc: public-ws-chor@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Abstract messages [Was: Multi-Party Binding Scenario]
> 
> 
> 
> Jon:
> 
> > In that case, it would appear there is no harm in assuming,
> > within the 
> > scope of WS-Choroegraphy, that there is a WSDL + XML Schema 
> > representation of ASN.1.
> 
> I am in complete agreement on that: WSDL is the right 
> language in the context of Web services for describing 
> protocols, and I hope this group sees things that way too. 
> And it doesn't exclude the possibility of developing 
> "abstract-plus-binding" schemes either.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 4 April 2003 13:16:45 UTC