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

RE: Primer Text for "Versioning and Service Equivalency"

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 00:55:33 +0100
Message-ID: <2B7789AAED12954AAD214AEAC13ACCEF2709E3F1@i2km02-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hi Dave,

> I'm surprised you didn't mention or use:
> http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2004/06/29/interface_compatibility_v2

I'm not sure if the formalisation is primer material, though think we've covered 
all of the cases informally in the text. Feel free to add any you think i've missed.

> http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2004/06/29/scenarios_for_interface_com
> patibility

I've added a paragraph headed 'Evolving a Service' to explain the decision tree.

> http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2004/06/29/using_wsdl_schema_for_compa
> tible_evolution

We should await the resolution of LC124 before adding anything here.

> http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2004/12/01/versioning_service_data_usi
> ng_wsdl_application_data_feature

Added a point in the compatible section suggesting headers may be a mechanism for 
adding data to a message, especially when the body is fixed.

> I think that a couple of scenarios showing versioning would be great.
> For example, service is versioned in a compatible way, say new operation
> added.  What can the a receiver of the new WSDL do with it?  Another
> variation is using the header nee application data feature.  Another
> example, service is versioned incompatibly, what happens..

I'm worried about how much work this entails or how to do this in 
a concise way, but am more than happy for you to pick up the baton
and make any changes you deem necessary.


Received on Friday, 10 June 2005 23:55:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:54 UTC