- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 16:25:12 -0500
- To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Cc: "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
David Hull writes: > >I view MEPs as somewhat like Java interfaces. > > > My understanding is that features in general are analogous to > interfaces. MEPs are features, of course. > > Is that about right? >From [1]: "The SOAP extensibility model provides two mechanisms through which features can be expressed: the SOAP Processing Model and the SOAP Protocol Binding Framework (see 2. SOAP Processing Model and 4. SOAP Protocol Binding Framework). " I suppose your statement is generally true viewed from that perspective. Note, however, that the above frames features pretty broadly, as encompassing function that can be realized entirely in SOAP headers (modules), entirely in the binding (e.g. MEPs), or in combination. MEPs happen to be features that are designed specifically to be core characteristics of bindings in particular. So, while I think it's fair to say that MEPs act a lot like interfaces for the bindings, some other features may be independent of the binding. I suppose that all features are in some sense interfaces available in one or another SOAP implementation. So, I mostly agree with what you've suggested. I'm not sure it changes the conclusion about MEPs and bindings, but I think it's true as far as it goes. Thank you. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapfeature -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 28 March 2006 21:25:26 UTC