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

RE: request for explanatory wording for features

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 11:07:54 -0400
Message-ID: <CB1FF0A474AEA84EA0206D5B05F6A4CB043701DA@S1001EXM02.macromedia.com>
To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org


(writing this on a plane - not sure if I'll be able to get it
 sent before Sunday night...)

Hi all:

> Feature proponents: Can someone please give some explanatory
> sentences that explains what a feature is? The current wording
> is, um, recursive:
> 
>     "A Feature component describes a particular feature that
>      a Web service accepts or requires in particular interactions."
> 
> While its cool to have a recursive definition, it doesn't help
> anyone understand what a feature is supposed to be. Maybe there's
> wording in the SOAP spec we can borrow (or refer to). Can someone
> take this on please? Glen?

Sure.  How about this (paraphrased from the SOAP spec):

	A feature component describes an abstract piece of
	functionality typically associated with the exchange of
	messages between communicating parties.  Although WSDL
	poses no constraints on the potential scope of such
	features, examples might include "reliability",
	"security", "correlation", and "routing".  The presence
	of a feature component in a WSDL description indicates
	that the feature is either accepted or required in
	particular interactions.

This is a band-aid patch that clears up the particular wording you
noted had problems.  I do plan to take a swing at creating some further
explanatory text about features/properties in general, as discussed
a couple of F2F's ago.

--Glen
Received on Sunday, 21 September 2003 11:07:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:26 GMT