Re: WSDL-S's action and related WS-Addressing and WSDL discussions and concepts

Hi Hugo,

>>The main difference is that WSDL-S has it at the operation level,
>>whereas discussions in the Web services worlds have let to the
>>conclusion that it should be a message level property.

Based on your above statement, I have a couple of questions, which will
help me in understanding the intent of adding "action" as a message level
property instead of an operation level property.

1. Is there a particular scenario, in which a message can be sent to a Web
   service, without being associated with a particular operation? In
   other words, can a SOAP message be sent to a Web service, without
   having an operation name in it?

2. In WSDL 2.0, where there is no explicit message construct (unless I am
   totally wrong about this), how can we make it a message level property.

>From our perspective, We chose to add "action" as an operation level
property (annotation in WSDL-S terms), as we perceive operations as atomic
units of functionality of Web services. Annotation of operations
with the "action" concept (along with pre and post conditions), helps us
in describing the functional semantics of a particular operation. That is
consistent with the METEOR-S [1] philosophy of using 4 types of semantics
(functional, data, behavorial and non-functional) to describe the semantics
of Web services and processes. Details of where the semantics are used
in the Web service and process lifecyle are given in [2,3].

[1] http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/projects/meteor-s
[2] http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/lib/presentations/WWW2003-ESSW-invitedTalk-Sheth.pdf
[3] http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/lib/download/Schlageter-book-chapter-final.pdf

Thanks,
Kunal Verma

Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2005 21:37:09 UTC