Jean-Jacques, IMO in WSDL the term MEP is a bit different from SOAP MEP. The difference is that in SOAP an MEP may span multiple nodes and is defined from the point of view of a message, whereas WSDL describes one node and all MEPs used in WSDL must be defined from the point of view of that one described node. In WSDL, other MEPs than one-way and request/response should IMHO be viewed as orchestration, out of scope of WSDL. Therefore we can hardcode these two. Best regards, Jacek Kopecky Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation http://www.systinet.com/ On Fri, 24 May 2002, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote: > I was not able to attend yesterday, and I apologize in advance if > I am reiterating a discussion that has occured already, but I > wanted to point out that I agree with Glen and that, if possible, > MEPs should not be hardcoded into the spec. > > Specifically, SOAP 1.2 currently defines one MEP. It is expected > that specification for other MEPs will be produced in the future. > I think it would be desirable that these other MEPs can be > described in WSDL, otherwise there will be services out there > that cannot be described (and hence used). It would be desirable > if these other MEPs can be described without us reopening the > whole spec every time. > > Thank you, > > Jean-Jacques. >Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 09:50:16 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:14:27 GMT