- From: Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 13:48:38 -0400
- To: "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Arthur's statement regarding the importance of discovery in the Grid
applications we are looking at.
A single "type" of a service, as manifested by an explicit association
between a wsdl:interface and a wsdl:service would make searching within
registries (UDDI or otherwise) easier.
As it stands now, some of the service interfaces we have been building have
to return a list of interfaces supported. Reducing this to a singleton, ie
THE interface implemented by the service, simplifies a couple of aspects of
the OGSI programming model.
sgg
++++++++
Steve Graham
sggraham@us.ibm.com
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
Emerging Technologies
++++++++
"Arthur Ryman"
<ryman@ca.ibm.com To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
> cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Sent by: Subject: Re: Minutes, 1 May 2003 WS Description WG telcon
www-ws-desc-reque
st@w3.org
05/05/2003 09:38
AM
Some amendments to the minutes:
1. I wasn't the one who said this:
... IBM\Arthur notes that some aspects of Schema are not well understood
and thus not implemented.
It's probably true but I don't recall who said that.
2. I mentioned a third benefit to the proposal for a service to implement a
single interface:
Searching for a service that implements a given interface, e.g. in UDDI,
becomes simpler if the service has an interface explicitly associated with
it. I believe this is important for GRID.
Arthur Ryman
Received on Monday, 5 May 2003 13:51:21 UTC