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

RE: issue: service type

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 16:49:21 +0200 (CEST)
To: Matt Long <mlong@phalanxsys.com>
cc: "'WS-Desc WG (Public)'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206051648180.982-100000@mail.idoox.com>

 Matt, one of the issues is that you cannot just pass a URL as a 
pointer to a service, you need the service QName, too. And the 
QName by itself is not sufficient either because you may not know 
where a WSDL definition of that QName is located.

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation
                   http://www.systinet.com/



On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Matt Long wrote:

 > 
 > What issues(s) do multi-service WSDLs present?
 > 
 > 
 > -Matt Long
 > Phalanx Systems, LLC
 > 
 > > -----Original Message-----
 > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
 > On
 > > Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana
 > > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 2:47 PM
 > > To: WS-Desc WG (Public)
 > > Subject: Fw: issue: service type
 > > 
 > > 
 > > I posted this a while back, but there was literally no discussion
 > > that I can recall. Is this issue so boring??
 > > 
 > > Also related is the following:
 > >     <issue id="issue-multiple-services">
 > >       <head>Should a single WSDL file only define one service?</head>
 > >       WSDL 1.1 suppports having multiple services in a single WSDL
 > >       file. This has caused confusion amongst users.
 > >       <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>
 > >     </issue>
 > > 
 > > Anyone with opinions or can I resolve it myself? ;-)
 > > 
 > > Sanjiva.
 > > 
 > > ----- Original Message -----
 > > From: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
 > > To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
 > > Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 6:29 AM
 > > Subject: issue: service type
 > > 
 > > 
 > > > I would like to open discussion on the following issue:
 > > >
 > > > <issue id="issue-service-type">
 > > >   <head>Should we have an abstract view of a service?</head>
 > > >   WSDL defines a service as a collection of ports, but there is no
 > > >   abstract analog.
 > > >   <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>
 > > > </issue>
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > Sanjiva.
 > > >
 > 
 > 
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2002 11:07:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:20 GMT