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

RE: proposal for restricting a service to a single interface

From: <Richard.Chennault@kp.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 13:20:23 -0700
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF80035728.600EBCA5-ON88256D12.006FA6FA-88256D12.006FBB02@KP.ORG>
+1 if only for the Matrix reference!


Regards,
Richard D. Chennault






"David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
04/23/2003 03:11 PM
 
        To:     "'Martin Gudgin'" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "'Sanjiva 
Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: proposal for restricting a service to a single 
interface


Gudge,

As I said in an earlier email, it is often the case that people need to 
KNOW
whether the endpoints that implement the same interface in a service are
equivalent to each other or not.  There's currently no way of indicating
that in WSDL, at least not that I know of.  I suggested one simple way ( a
special containment element for equivalent endpoints), but Sanjiva's
approach is even simpler.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Martin Gudgin
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 2:47 PM
> To: Sanjiva Weerawarana; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: proposal for restricting a service to a single interface
>
>
>
> I must confess to not really understanding the motivation behind this
> proposal. It seems to me that people that want a service to implement
> but a single interface can define such a service today using
> our current
> spec. And those that want a service to implement multiple
> interfaces can
> also do that today. I'm not sure why we would want to remove one of
> these capabilities.
>
> Gudge
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana
> > Sent: 21 April 2003 23:40
> > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
>
>


------ Attachment(s) have been removed ------
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:32:53 GMT

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