RE: What does WSDL describe?

-1

WSDL needs to focus on describing messages received by / sent from a
service. Any normative differences between an 'interactions/exchange'
and 'interface/operation' would be a commitment to model.

--Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 8:21 AM
> To: Jim Webber
> Cc: 'Savas Parastatidis'; 'Anne Thomas Manes'; www-ws-desc@w3.org;
> distobj@acm.org
> Subject: Re: What does WSDL describe?
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 04:10:09PM -0000, Jim Webber wrote:
> > Savas:
> >
> > > <interactions>
> > >   <exchange>
> > >     <input message="" />
> > >   </exchange>
> > >   <exchange>
> > >     <input message="" />
> > >     <output message="" />
> > >   </exchange>
> > > <interactions>
> > >
> > > Yet something else to consider :-)
> >
> > I like it. It is short (Anne's concern), and captures what a service
> does
> > (exchanges messages). It is unambiguous too since it does not imply
any
> > semantics like certain other keywords do :-)
> 
> What about supporting both "operation" and "exchange", as they mean
> different things, and it seems that folks want both.
> 
> "exchange", as I understand what Savas means by it, would be used for
> what I call "state transfer".  But when there is an operation in
effect,
> "operation" would be used.
> 
> This would mostly address my issue, in fact, as by using one or the
> other, a WSDL document would be resolving the previous ambiguity I
> discussed.
> 
> Mark.
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca