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

FW: Issue 32: SOAP 1.1 support

From: Liu, Kevin <kevin.liu@sap.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:32:26 +0100
Message-ID: <99CA63DD941EDC4EBA897048D9B0061DA95DC6@uspalx20a.pal.sap.corp>
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org

This is a resend - I just realize that this message was only sent to the WG private list which is not my real intention. 

Best Regards,
Kevin
 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Liu, Kevin
Sent: Wednesday, Jan 21, 2004 04:59 PM
To: 'Tom Jordahl'; 'David Orchard'; 'Web Services Description'
Subject: RE: Issue 32: SOAP 1.1 support


SAP shares the position with BEA that our customers favor soap 1.1 binding support in wsdl2.0. But we are open to how this support should be provided in WSDL2.0. 

Given the potential hassle around IP and charter changes, we are leaning to support Philipe's proposal for leveraging soap 1.1 binding in WSDL1.1 - at least we should investigate its feasibility first.  

Best Regards,
Kevin
 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Jordahl
Sent: Wednesday, Jan 21, 2004 10:56 AM
To: 'David Orchard'; 'Web Services Description'
Subject: RE: Issue 32: SOAP 1.1 support




I believe David makes a forceful and compelling argument in favor of
supporting a SOAP 1.1 binding.

+1 to including it as a normative part of WSDL 2.0.

--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of David Orchard
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:22 PM
To: 'Philippe Le Hegaret'
Cc: 'Web Services Description'
Subject: RE: Issue 32: SOAP 1.1 support


BEA can certainly add this to our charter review.

However, we wanted to bring it up to the group for discussion.  We apologize
for the lateness of this comment, but it's taken us a while to get to
internal consensus on this.  It would be interesting to hear if members of
the WG agree or disagree, and I've already heard 1 agreement.

It seems to us that S11 is arguably in the current charter.  Words like
"which is the scope of the WSDL 1.1 specification.".  I can understand
calling out S12 as it is done in the charter, because S12 isn't in WS11
scope.

Comments inline.

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philippe Le Hegaret [mailto:plh@w3.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 9:59 AM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: Web Services Description
> Subject: Re: Issue 32: SOAP 1.1 support
>
>
> On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 19:16, David Orchard wrote:
> > We ask the group to consider resolving Issue 32 in favour
> of SOAP 1.1
> > support.
>
> I'm concerned about the deliverables and schedule of the WSD WG.
>

And I'm also concerned about deliverables and schedule, and particularly
concerned that the WG may produce a product that does not get as widespread
adoption as we hope.

> A proposal could be to take the SOAP binding markup published in WSDL
> 1.1 and publish a WG Note on how to use it in WSDL 2.0. Something kind
> of similar to work done by Keith regarding using SOAP 1.2 in
> WSDL 1.1.

That's an interesting idea, wholely re-using the WSDL 1.1 markup.  I'm
interested in others opinions on this solution.

> Going beyond that would require more resources from this
> group that I'm
> not sure we are willing to spend.
>
> I suggest that a comment regarding the deliverables of this
> group should
> be made to the current AC review if your company would like
> to see this
> work item happening.
>
> Philippe
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2004 18:32:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:28 GMT