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

Re: SOAP Modules and Features (LC18, LC29b)

From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:42:00 -0700
Message-ID: <41786568.1040301@webmethods.com>
To: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
CC: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>, hadley@sun.com, WS Description List <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Hi Glen,

I am trying reconcile the following two groups of statements..

>"By virtue of the fact that you understand the SOAP Module 
>URI, you understand which, if any, abstract features the 
>module implements."

>No, I'm not making those assumptions at all.  Module authors MUST give a
>name (a URI) to their Modules.  That's all.  They MAY also decide to
>indicate in the Module spec that certain abstract Features are
>implemented by this Module, but they don't have to.

If the Features are not identified in the Module, how do you expect the 
Features the module implements to be deduced (for automated processing 
anyway)?

It seems to me this should be a best practice minimally..

Regards, Prasad

Glen Daniels wrote:

>>"By virtue of the fact that you understand the SOAP Module 
>>URI, you understand which, if any, abstract features the 
>>module implements."
>>
>>You are making an assumption that the SOAP Module spec author:
>>
>>- will specify an URI for a WSDL Abstract Feature
>>- will declare the WSDL Abstract Feature that their SOAP 
>>Module realizes
>>
>>If so, I expect the WSDL spec to stipulate these requirements 
>>for SOAP Module spec authors. Right?
>>    
>>
>
>No, I'm not making those assumptions at all.  Module authors MUST give a
>name (a URI) to their Modules.  That's all.  They MAY also decide to
>indicate in the Module spec that certain abstract Features are
>implemented by this Module, but they don't have to.
>
>--Glen
>  
>
Received on Friday, 22 October 2004 01:43:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT