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

Re: MEPs: Hardcoded or not? (was: Re: Minutes of teleconference 02-05-23)

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 15:50:06 +0200 (CEST)
To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, Glen Daniels <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205281538200.16021-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 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-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:20 GMT