- From: Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:08:38 -0400
- To: "Savas Parastatidis" <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Cc: "David Snelling" <d.snelling@fle.fujitsu.com>, "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "Paul Watson" <Paul.Watson@newcastle.ac.uk>, public-ws-desc-state@w3c.org, public-ws-desc-state-request@w3.org, "Steve Tuecke" <tuecke@mcs.anl.gov>
Why do you feel this is domain specific? Use of attributes cuts across
many domains. Is this any more domain specific than CORBA IDL Attributes?
++++++++
Steve Graham
sggraham@us.ibm.com
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
++++++++
"Savas Parastatidis"
<Savas.Parastatidis@newca To: Steve Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
stle.ac.uk> cc: "David Snelling" <d.snelling@fle.fujitsu.com>, "Jim Webber"
Sent by: <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "Paul Watson" <Paul.Watson@newcastle.ac.uk>,
public-ws-desc-state-requ <public-ws-desc-state@w3c.org>, <public-ws-desc-state-request@w3.org>, "Steve Tuecke"
est@w3.org <tuecke@mcs.anl.gov>
Subject: RE: Some requirements
06/12/2003 06:54 PM
>
>
> What is the concern with defining an interface that contains those
> operations? If the service wishes to provide "standard" operations on
the
> attributes, then that service would include that interface in its set
of
> supported interfaces. If it chooses not to include that interface,
then
> the
> requestor is clear that the attributes are not accessible.
>
I feel that this as an application domain specific requirement and not a
requirement for an interface/protocol description language. I see WSDL
as the enabling tool for describing interfaces or protocols. Defining a
set of particular operations/attributes as prerequisites (or even
optional) should not be the responsibility of the language but rather
the particular application domain (through an appropriate specification
that uses the language).
.savas.
Received on Thursday, 12 June 2003 19:12:08 UTC