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

Re: Bindings

From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:23:07 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9A331A.62C5B58D@webmethods.com>
To: Sandeep Kumar <sandkuma@cisco.com>
CC: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Sandeep (et al),

WSDL 1.1 in its current form is designed to be a language used by the provider
of the service to unilaterally describe the service (interfaces,  bindings,
access-points etc.).  I can see extending this to accommodate specification of
different levels of QoS (say at different access points) by the provider.
However,  "Service Contract Binding"  implies to me a "contract/agreement
between two are more parties".

Regards,

Prasad Yendluri
---------------------------------------------------------------
Principal Architect, ATG; webMethods Inc.,
432 Lakeside Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3793, USA
Tel: (408) 962-5226 mailto: pyendluri@webmethods.com
---------------------------------------------------------------

Sandeep Kumar wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In today's meeting, we had a discussion on *bindings* and we agreed upon,
> *InterfaceBinding*. I like that as well.
>
> We were also discussing about a broader notion of binding, such QoS etc.,
> and it was felt that it is one of the *significant* features that we can add
> to WSDL 1.1.
>
> I wonder if Service Contract Binding would be a better term or an "extension
> point" for such meta-level concepts.
>
> Thanks,
> Sandeep Kumar
> Cisco Systems
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 14:20:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:19 GMT