RE: A different binding example (was RE: Binding)

Wouldn't that be a WSDL HTTP Binding that you are talking about?

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edwin Khodabakchian [mailto:edwink@collaxa.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 2:39 PM
> To: Ugo Corda; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: A different binding example (was RE: Binding)
> 
> 
> Agreed. The only reason I did not mention WSDL is that the Web Queue
> resource does NOT expose customized methods or operations. - Edwin
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ugo Corda
> > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 2:32 PM
> > To: edwink@collaxa.com; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: A different binding example (was RE: Binding)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > When a developer issue a GET on
> > > that resource, it returns the XML Schema of the expense 
> report XML 
> > > document that the queue accepts as input as well as meta 
> > information:
> > > - request needs to include a signature header element for 
> > > authentication
> > > - request needs a callback header element (containing a 
> > callback URL).
> > > - request needs a unique correlation set: rule on how the 
> > unique key/message id
> > >   can be computed using data element contained in the request.
> > 
> > It's probably faster to say that the GET returns the WSDL for 
> > the service (assuming we'll soon have a standard way for 
> > expressing SOAP Features in WSDL).
> > 
> > Ugo
> > 
> > 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 6 January 2003 18:47:33 UTC