W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > April 2003

Re: proposal for restricting a service to a single interface

From: Kenneth Chiu <chiuk@cs.indiana.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 14:46:47 -0500 (EST)
To: James M Snell <jasnell@us.ibm.com>
cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.53.0304221441410.28344@baldy.extreme.indiana.edu>

I believe the intent would be that you define one interface
that inherits from those multiple portTypes.

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, James M Snell wrote:

> I understand the motivation for this, but I'm a bit confused... if y'all
> add this limitation, how do I describe a single service that does in fact
> implement multiple portTypes (e.g. OGSA services)
>
> - James M Snell
>   jasnell@us.ibm.com
>   http://www.ibm.com
>   (877) 511-5082 / Office
>   930-1979 / Tie Line
>
>
>
> "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> 04/21/2003 03:39 PM
>
> To
> <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
> proposal for restricting a service to a single interface
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Following up on the action item I have, I'd like to propose
> the following:
>
> - Require all <port>s within a <service> element to implement
>   exactly the same interface. Thus, each <port> is an alternate
>   implementation of the same interface.
> - The interface will be indicated with a new attribute:
>     <service interface="qname"> ... </service>
> - As with any interface in WSDL 1.2, this interface could
>   have extended any number of other interfaces.
>
> I will soon send the updated binding proposal which takes this
> into account to dramatically simplify the binding stuff. If
> this doesn't get accepted then I'll re-do the binding proposal.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2003 15:46:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:23 GMT