W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > July 2006

CR047 of Web Services Description Language Version 2.0

From: Gilbert Pilz <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:19:09 -0700
Message-ID: <E16EB59B8AEDF445B644617E3C1B3C9C01E4ECE9@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: <ramkumar.menon@gmail.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Ramkumar,

In May you raised the following issue
(http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR047) against
the WSDL 2.0 Candidate Recommendation.

This issue was addressed during the June 8th meeting of the working
group
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Jun/att-0033/200606
08-ws-desc-minutes.html).

The consensus of the working group was that, while a Service component
that referenced an Interface component that contained no Interface
Operation components may not be particularly useful (in that the defined
service couldn't actually do anything), neither was it particularly
harmful. Some members of the working group thought that there might be
cases where someone may want to define such a service as part of a
"bottom up" iterative service development process.

Given that:

A) There doesn't seem to be any real harm in defining a service that
doesn't support any operations.

B) There may be cases in which someone would like to define such a
service.

C) Adding checks to ensure that all Service components reference
Interface components that contain one or more Interface Operation
components requires additional effort in the WSDL 2.0 parser and
associated tools.

the decision was made to close this issue with no action.

If you have any further concerns over this or any other issue, please
feel free to bring them to the working group at
mailto:www-ws-desc@w3.org.

Gilbert Pilz
Sr. Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO
BEA Systems Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2006 22:19:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:41 GMT