W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > February 2004

Re: WSDL and pub/sub

From: Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 15:16:43 -0500
Message-ID: <4031252B.4FE31B9E@bah.com>
To: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>, Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>, Burdett David <david.burdett@commerceone.com>, Andrew Berry <andyb@whyanbeel.net>, Steve Ross-Talbot <steve@enigmatec.net>, WS Choreography <public-ws-chor@w3.org>

I thought about this more (up for a good challenge today):

If we were to do this for ebXML Registry, we would first need to create
a third interface to the registry (in addition to the current
QueryManager and LifeCycleManager interfaces) for Event Notification.
All notification messages would be sent on this interface. With this
approach, and if we were (hypothetically) to implement WS-Eventing, a
subscribing Web Service would use a wse:Filter expression to filter for
events that pertain to the RegistryObject(s) of its interest.

Is this along the lines of what you're thinking?

Kind Regards,
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton

Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> Same with ebXML Registry. I think I should defer to Farrukh at this
> point for a more detailed explanation. :)
> 
> Ugo Corda wrote:
> >
> > I am not sure what you mean by "a Web Service that is external to the
> > registry contents". In UDDI, all interactions with registry contents
> > occur via Web service interfaces, and I thought the same was true for
> > the ebXML Registry.
> >
> > Ugo
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 11:37 AM
> > > To: Ugo Corda
> > > Cc: Monica J. Martin; Farrukh Najmi; Burdett David; Andrew
> > > Berry; Steve Ross-Talbot; WS Choreography
> > > Subject: Re: WSDL and pub/sub
> > >
> > >
> > > I believe that that is certainly one possible approach, and
> > > if there were open Web Services eventing standards (meaning
> > > open standards body) available at the time that the Event
> > > Notification feature were architected it may/may not have
> > > been done this way. However, would it be possible (or even
> > > efficient) to have a subscriber be notified by a Web Service
> > > that is external to the registry contents about and event
> > > that happened to a RegistryObject within the registry? I
> > > could be off base, but it seems to me that a more efficient
> > > approach is to have the subscription "close" to the contents
> > > themselves.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Joe Chiusano
> > >
> > > Ugo Corda wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would have thought that an ebXML Registry client would
> > > subscribe to
> > > > the Registry itself (seen as a Web service) in order to get
> > > > notifications on events related to the contents you
> > > describe. Is that
> > > > not so?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Ugo
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> > > > > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 11:02 AM
> > > > > To: Monica J. Martin
> > > > > Cc: Ugo Corda; Farrukh Najmi; Burdett David; Andrew Berry; Steve
> > > > > Ross-Talbot; WS Choreography
> > > > > Subject: Re: WSDL and pub/sub
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It would also be highly unlikely that the ebXML Registry adopt
> > > > > WS-Eventing or WS-Notification from the standpoint of their main
> > > > > mission. The event notification feature of the registry
> > > is based on
> > > > > registry contents (subscriptions to RegistryObjects, etc.) rather
> > > > > than subscriptions to Web Services themselves.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > Joe Chiusano
> > > > > Member, ebXML Registry TC
> > > > >
> > > > > "Monica J. Martin" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Corda: Farrukh,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Do you guys have any plan of adopting one of the
> > > emerging pub/sub
> > > > > > >specs, i.e. WS-Eventing or WS-Notification?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Thank you,
> > > > > > >Ugo
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > mm1: I believe someone on this list has already questioned the
> > > > > > implications of any open standards' body adopting proprietary
> > > > > > specifications.
> > > > >
> > >
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 15:17:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 01:00:51 GMT