W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2002

RE: Draft agenda: 24 June TAG teleconference (Arch document, WSA update)

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 15:38:59 -0400
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3412CB9C.B445CA8E-ON85256BE2.006C5AFF@lotus.com>

I am not a super-expert in WSDL, and in any case don't have time to figure 
out all the specifics of David's concern.  One clarification does seem to 
be in order though:

David Orchard writes:

>  The WSDL 1.1 GET binding with query parameters - 
> the type suggested by the SOAP 1.2 specification 
> for GET - does not provide any mechanism for
> expressing the syntactice schema of the types 
> expressed in the GET query.

I'm not sure where you get the impression that any particular WSDL 
mechanism is "suggested" by SOAP 1.2.  The new versions of the SOAP drafts 
say [1]:

        "Note:

        Conventions for specific URI encodings of 
        procedure names and arguments, as well as 
        for controlling the inclusion of such 
        arguments in the SOAP RPC body could 
        be established in conjunction with the 
        development of Web Service interface 
        description languages, could be developed 
        when SOAP is bound to particular 
        programming languages, or could be 
        established on an application or 
        procedure-specific basis.'

There is no reference to any particular Web Services interface language, 
and certainly not to any particular "binding" that happens to be available 
in today's versions of WSDL.  The note above is a signal to groups such as 
the WSDL working group that they may wish to consider development of 
bindings from (the resource identifying aspects of) RPC interface 
descriptions into various URL schemes.  In fact, there is (as far as I can 
tell) no normative reference from the SOAP drafts to WSDL at all.  There 
is certainly no presumption that some existing WSDL HTTP binding would be 
the one to use (though you certainly can if it meets your needs.)

So, I have some concern that you may be raising to the Tag concerns which 
are based on at least a partial misunderstanding of what the Protocols WG 
has agreed to.  Thank you.

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part2.html#RPCWebArguments


------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 24 June 2002 15:57:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:08 GMT