Re: WSDL, parameter typing, and forms

"Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 11:55:57AM -0700, David Orchard wrote:
> > One of the interesting places this might lead us, is that if we think
that
> > there should be typing available for the GET query string, I'm not sure
that
> > it's a WSD problem.  Seems like mapping Schema to url-encoded nvp is
more
> > general than wsd.
>
> IMO, this is most definitely a WSDL problem.  HTML forms are currently
> more capable than WSDL here; they have a type system[1], and a means to
> bind those types to field names.

I can't get to that URL right now (network problems) but WSDL has
exactly that capability: it provides a means to bind types to field
names via the <message> construct. Please also see my answer to
David Orchard's original note for more details.

> I don't think it's appropriate to put type information in the URI
> because the URI is opaque to the client.  If the client is constructing
> a URI, it should only be because the server told it how, with a form.
> And in that case, the server already knows the types.

I agree! So if someone used appropriate types in writing a WSDL
then that's how the "server" told the "client" about the types . No more, no
less.

Sanjiva.