WSDL happiness


I sat in on the WS-Desc F2F via telephone yesterday while they discussed the
three issues raised by DAWG re: WSDL 2.0:

1. outputSerialization limitations
2. faultSerialization limitations
3. POSTing application/x-www-urlencoded

The WS-Desc members decided to rework how they handle input, output, and
fault serializations, choosing a design based roughly on HTTP Accept:
header, though I'm not totally sure of the details because the connection
was very bad. At any rate, with the anticipated changes to WSDL 2.0, we'll
be able to more accurately describe our protocol as a web service. Which is
a good thing.

Re: (3), there was some question, because the WG apparently had intended a
design whereby it was possible to POST urlencoded In Messages to an
endpoint, but after chasing down all of their specs, which was not an easy
task, I'd concluded that it wasn't possible.

After several conversations with Hugo, the W3C contact for WS-Desc, he
encouraged me to file a LC about (3). When I spoke to the WG yesterday, they
assured me (3) was w/in their design and I took an action to figure out what
parts of the spec had misled me.

Apparently after I was no longer able to call in, they started reviewing
some of their specs with (3) in mind and they concluded that I'd been
correct, that the language as-written made (3) illegal.

While this will require, or so it would seem, some spec surgery on their
part, our preferred protocol design will be able to be expressed with WSDL
2.0, eventually, after they make the requisite changes.

For my money, this was a good example of WGs working together efficiently
and courteously.

Sad songs and waltzes aren't selling this year... --Cake

Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2005 20:29:00 UTC