Hmmm.... A service may have multiple WSDL files. I suppose the WSDL file that defines the <wsdl:service> is the definitive definition of the service, but I'm not sure that the definition of a thing is the same as the name of the thing. The WSDL URL identifies the WSDL file. I contend that a WSDL file is a different resouce from the thing it defines. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoff Arnold" <Geoff.Arnold@Sun.COM> To: "Anne Thomas Manes" <anne@manes.net> Cc: <www-ws-arch@w3.org> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 6:09 PM Subject: Re: Definition for a Web Service > On Monday, August 11, 2003, at 05:45 PM, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > > The way I see it, the service URI *names* the service (effectively > > equivalent to the wsdl:service @name). It is not and should not be > > construed > > to be an endpoint of the service. > > +1 .... but in the case where the service and its endpoint(s) are > described by an HTTP-accessible WSDL document, is there anything we > want to > say about the [?non]relationship between the URI for the WSDL and the > URI > which *names* the service? > > Just curious..... > > Geoff >Received on Monday, 11 August 2003 18:40:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:22 GMT