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

RE: choreography protocol

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 09:26:19 -0700
Message-ID: <EDDE2977F3D216428E903370E3EBDDC9081213@MAIL01.stc.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

Jean-Jacques,
I didn't know of the new In/Out MEP. I guess that could be used to indicate request and response on different channels, while the Request/Response remains associated with a unique channel.

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr]
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 12:30 AM
> To: Ugo Corda
> Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana; public-ws-chor@w3.org
> Subject: Re: choreography protocol
> 
> 
> Ugo, did you look at "WSDL 1.2 Part2: Patterns" [1]? Would this help?
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> [1] 
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl12/wsdl1
2-patterns.html>

Ugo Corda wrote:

> Yes, relying on the WSDL binding works when you can express that
> binding in your spec. But what if you are writing a spec (e.g. a
> choreography spec) that prefers to leave WSDL bindings unspecified
> but still wants to talk about request/response on the same channel
> vs. on different channels? WSDL right now does not specify any way to
> express that.
Received on Monday, 23 June 2003 12:26:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 01:00:21 GMT