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

Re: write-up of interaction patterns

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 04:57:30 -0500
Message-ID: <004301c2c06a$5bb414b0$29060e09@lankabookwin2k>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

But I thought we all agreed at some F2F that WSDL was always
describing the server's perspective. If that agreement still
holds then the "what node am I" issue is not there .. the WSDL
description of the MEP always takes the role of the "server"
of the MEP.

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 4:06 AM
Subject: Re: write-up of interaction patterns


> Either syntax is fine with me, as long as we can carry the
> information described by Glen below.
>
> Jean-Jacques.
>
> Glen Daniels wrote:
> > When you lay this into WSDL, I think you need both "what node am I" and
"what
> > messages in the WSDL correspond to what messages in the MEP description.
An
> > example of this would be as follows (using my preferred syntax, natch
:)):
> >
> > <operation mep="request-response-uri" role="node-B-uri">
> >   <input message="someMessage" role="Request"/>
> >   <output message="otherMessage" role="Response"/>
> > </operation>
Received on Monday, 20 January 2003 05:00:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:22 GMT