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>
 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

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 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:38 UTC