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

Re: choreography protocol

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:38:34 +0600
Message-ID: <01d201c3386f$c759c3e0$02c8a8c0@lankabook2>
To: "Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com>, "Jean-Jacques Dubray" <jjd@eigner.com>
Cc: "'Ugo Corda'" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

"Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com> writes:
> WSDL 1.2 has in-out and request-response. The distinction is that for 
> request-response the response would be sent on the same channel as the 
> request. There is no such constraint for in-out. So if you are using the 
> in-out operation with some layer that supports reliable messaging or 
> coordination you would in fact have signals travelling back and forth.

Just to be clear - these patterns are not agreed to in the WG yet.
This is still work in progress.

My personal feeling is that its better to just have request-response
and not say at the abstract level whether or not the response is on
the same channel or not. That's a binding characteristic - the 
abstraction is that there's a request and there will be a response.
Take an SMTP binding - every response would be on a separate channel
vs. and HTTP binding where the response can be on the same channel.

Received on Saturday, 21 June 2003 23:38:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:59 UTC