W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > January 2005

RE: Choice of response message in WSDL

From: Liu, Kevin <kevin.liu@sap.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:02:30 +0100
Message-ID: <99CA63DD941EDC4EBA897048D9B0061D0B1C15CC@uspalx20a.pal.sap.corp>
To: "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>, "Tony Fletcher" <tony.fletcher@choreology.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, <www-ws-desc-request@w3.org>
Hi Tony,
 
I agree with what Arthur has said about  the use of GED or MEP to
address your issue, so no more to say in that regard. 
 
Just want to clarify the code examples you gave in your initial message
(copied below). They indicate the need for out-bound operations and
contradict the request (from the ws-chor group to the WSD group ) for
removing out-bound MEPs from WSDL2.0. Can you confirm the
correctness/accuracy of the examples?   

Best Regards,
Kevin
  

[<kl>] <snap>  
In WS-Choreography I would like to be able to write, for example,
something like: 
<interaction name="ABCF" channelVariable="tns:aChannel" operation="a"> 
     <participate relationshipType="SuperiorInferior"
fromRole="tns:Superior" toRole="Inferior"/> 
     <exchange name="A" informationType="Atype" action="request"> 
             <send variable="tns:A"/> 
             <receive variable="tns:A"/> 
      </exchange> 
      <exchange name="B" informationType="BType" action="respond"> 
             <send variable="tns:B"/> 
             <receive variable="tns:B"/> 
       </exchange> 
       <exchange name="C" informationType="CType" action="respond"> 
             <send variable="tns:C"/> 
             <receive variable="tns:C"/> 
       </exchange> 
       <exchange name="F" informationType="FType" action="respond"> 
             <send variable="tns:F" causeException="true"/> 
             <receive variable="tns:F" causeException="true"/> 
       </exchange> 
</interaction> 
 
and in the corresponding Web Service description  I would like to be
able to write something like: 
<portType name="Requester">
   <operation name="abc">
        <output message="tns:A"/>
        <input message="tns:B"/>
        <input message="tns:C"/>
        <fault name="fault" message="tns:F"/>
   </operation>
</portType>
<portType name="Responder">
   <operation name="abc">
        <input message="tns:A"/>
        <output message="tns:B"/>
        <output message="tns:C"/>
        <fault name="fault" message="tns:F"/>
   </operation>
</portType> 
 
or with explicit choice construct: 
<portType name="Requester">
   <operation name="abc">
        <output message="tns:A"/>
        <choice> 
             <input message="tns:B"/>
            <input message="tns:C"/> 
        </choice>
        <fault name="fault" message="tns:F"/>
   </operation>
</portType>
<portType name="Responder">
   <operation name="abc">
        <input message="tns:A"/>
        <choice> 
             <output message="tns:B"/>
            <output message="tns:C"/>
         </choice>
      <fault name="fault" message="tns:F"/>
   </operation>
</portType> 
 
 [<kl>] </snap> 
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2005 19:05:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:34 GMT