W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2004

RE: Issue: should WSDL be able to describe an operation with *anything* in the message?

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 12:49:18 -0000
Message-ID: <2B7789AAED12954AAD214AEAC13ACCEF0FFF1FBD@i2km02-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

+1 

i think this sounds simple to specify and can immediately think of quite a few existing generic services which present such an interface but don't readily fall into the 'intermediary' bucket: dead-letter queues, message archivers, audit trails, etc.

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Jacek Kopecky
Sent: 18 February 2004 14:51
To: WS-Description WG
Subject: Issue: should WSDL be able to describe an operation with
*anything* in the message?



Hi all,

I stumbled upon a scenario the other day where I'd like to be able to
describe an endpoint with a single logical operation ("accept" or
"notify" or something) that can accept any SOAP message. Somebody wanted
a WSDL for this endpoint and I found out that WSDL 1.1 with a single
message part of the type xs:anyType is not supported in doc/lit, and in
fact in 
WSDL 2 such a thing cannot be accomplished at all because every message
has exactly one XML element and the SOAP binding puts precisely that
element as a child of soap:Body.

Should WSDL be able to describe such an endpoint? I think so because it
is common in various message sink situations - a router, a topic,
generic notification sink etc.

I can see a simple solution that would state that if a GED is not
specified for a message, it can be everything. There are other
alternative solutions, but this seems the simplest and least bad.

Sorry about bringing this up so late,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Systinet Corporation
                   http://www.systinet.com/
Received on Thursday, 19 February 2004 07:49:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:02 UTC