W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Web Service Description Requirements published

From: Didier VILLEVALOIS <dvillevalois@techmetrix.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 11:19:23 +0200
Message-ID: <6CED7AD2680ED611BB8E0090276CE92401ED93B6@mail-paris.sqli.com>
To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
> We invite comments on this document at public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org.
> We especially invite review and additional potential requirements from
> the following groups:
> 
>   Web Services Architecture Working Group
>   RDF Interest Group
>   XForms Working Group
> 
> - Jonathan Marsh, WS Desc WG Chair

Service composition and discovery is out of scope. But for an individual
web service, interface (in an object) is IMHO not sufficient for its correct
use. I think WSD would need a basic description of flow of method call
to appropriately use it.

For example, i may have a service that provides those two methods:
(sorry i'll do a simple RPC-based in Java)

interface MyService
{
	public ... firstStep(...);
	public ... secondStep(...);
}

I would have to describe that use of MyService is:
1. Call the firstStep() method
2. Then call the secondStep() method

I think this goes with fault description if we don't want to have a complete
workflow language (which is obviously out of scope). Maybe this should be
done by extending the SOAP hierarchy of faults. But shouldn't WSD have those
building blocks ?

I think this should take place in 'interactions with the client'
requirements.
I would express it like this:
"The description language MAY allow restricting/describing the possible flow
of messages between the Web Service and a Client. The description language
MAY
in particular allow describing what applicative Fault refers to what
incorrect
call flow."

Didier Villevalois.
didier@phpapp.org
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 05:19:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:30 GMT