W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2001

Re: A Little IDL

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 11:50:50 -0500
Message-ID: <000701c0a65d$99fdf2a0$e65c0209@watson.ibm.com>
To: "Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com>, "SOAP" <SOAP@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, "XML-Dev \(E-mail\)" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>, <soap@userland.com>
Hi Dave,

Can you please explain why you think WSDL is difficult or impossible
for (some) scripting environments to support? Also, can you please
explain what exactly "support" means?

There are several scripting environments that already support
building proxy objects from WSDL definitions. Similarly, it
is possible to write (generate) WSDL descriptions of services
implemented using scripting languages. Apache SOAP supports the
latter already.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com>
To: "SOAP" <SOAP@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM>; <xml-dist-app@w3.org>; "XML-Dev
(E-mail)" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>; <soap@userland.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 11:36 AM
Subject: RFC: A Little IDL

> Motivation: WSDL appears relatively difficult or impossible for (some)
> scripting environments to support. I wanted to start a public exploration of
> IDLs, so we can learn what the issues are, and the benefits, and to spark
> development of aggregators and directories. I also wanted to support XML-RPC
> so the fresh SOAP and deep XML-RPC communities get to know each other and
> can work with each other.
> http://www.xmlrpc.com/alidl
> Comments are requested on the XML-RPC discussion group and/or XML-RPC mail
> list. Pointers to both are at the bottom of the spec.
> Dave
> ______________________________
> Dave Winer, UserLand Software
> Daily notes: http://www.scripting.com/
> "It's even worse than it appears."
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2001 11:50:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:12 UTC