W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > July 2004

RE: Requesting WSDL Files

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 09:57:17 -0500
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E0416D2DE@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, www-ws-arch@w3.org

Is there anything non-RESTFUL about
http://example.org/my-web-service?wsdl ?  Looks to me kind of like a lot
of operations supported by the REST-view of the Web.

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Mark Baker
Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 9:45 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: Requesting WSDL Files

On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 02:33:07PM +0100, Savas Parastatidis wrote:
> > 
> > I just don't see how one could consider WS-RF RESTful .. can you 
> > expand more please?
> > 
> I agree with Sanjiva. I don't see how WS-RF can be considered as 
> RESTful. I would say that WS-RF builds an object-oriented or 
> resource-oriented view of the world using angle brackets but I 
> wouldn't call that REST. But then again... that's just me :-)


FWIW, using a URI convention isn't the best way to go about solving the
WSDL-discovery problem IMO.  A more RESTful solution (i.e. one which
respects REST's hypermedia-as-engine-of-application-state
constraint) would be to explicitly declare the relationship between
service and description, since those are really two resources.  So one
could imagine doing;

HEAD http://example.org/my-web-service/ HTTP/1.1


HTTP/1.1 200 Ok
Interface-Description: http://example.org/my-web-service/interface

which tells us that the returned URI identifies the interface
description.  Then this request could be used to retrieve the WSDL;

GET http://example.org/my-web-service/interface HTTP/1.1
Accept: application/wsdl+xml


Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca

  Seeking work on large scale application/data integration projects
  and/or the enabling infrastructure for same.
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2004 10:58:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:11 UTC