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

Re: WSDL 1.2/2.0

From: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 09:30:17 -0500
Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.2.20040209091459.03f40708@pop.earthlink.net>
To: "Rob Henley" <rob.henley@freeuk.com>, <www-ws@w3.org>

The WS-Desc team determined that the spec it was developing was 
sufficiently different from WSDL 1.1 that it was more appropriate to name 
it WSDL 2.0 rather than WSDL 1.2. So the team simply changed the name from 
WSDL 1.2 to WSDL 2.0. You should think of the last WSDL 1.2 working draft 
as an early version of the current WSDL 2.0 working draft.

SOAP 1.2 is complete, and developers can use WSDL 1.1 to describe SOAP 1.2 
services. But the fact of the matter is, very few products fully support 
SOAP 1.2, and anyone developing Web services using SOAP 1.2 will probably 
encounter interoperability issues for the immediate future. I agree with 
your third assumption.

Anne

At 03:55 AM 2/9/2004, Rob Henley wrote:
>Sorry if this is a FAQ, but I haven't seen this clarified anywhere.  Can 
>anyone say if these assumptions are correct?
>
>1.  WSDL 1.2 will not be developed further and will never progress from 
>working draft?
>2.  WSDL 2.0 as it currently stands is identical to WSDL 1.2, but is 
>intended to be developed by W3C to Recommendation status?
>3.  most businesses will probably wait for a finalised WSDL 2.0 before 
>migrating from SOAP 1.1 + WSDL 1.1 + basic Profile to SOAP 1.2 + WSDL 2.0?
>
>Many thanks
>Rob Henley
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anne Thomas Manes
VP & Research Director
Burton Group 
Received on Monday, 9 February 2004 10:35:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:45 GMT