- From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 20:17:49 -0800
- To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org " <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
What we are talking about in the various proposals for issue i059 is about changing bindings for a req-res operation to allow: 1) the request and response to be sent out over different HTTP-connections 2) WSDL authors to specify bindings to req-res operations that allow the request and response to use different WSDL Binding(s). None of this is about "async" from a client programmer POV. They are about bindings. Bindings specify how the message is serialized, and bound to the transport including whether different connections are used to send the request and response. For example, an SMTP binding will inherently using multiple connections. As another example, I'm free to write a single binding for a req-res operation which says the the request is sent over HTTP and the response over SMTP. There is another requirement for 'async' which is at the abstract WSDL level. Programing models and client-side APIs are generated by tools using the portType/interface information. Having a 'async' marker in the portType/interface as a hint to the WSDL processor is quite important from a client POV -- since most tools generate client-side APIs from the abstract WSDL. Pl. note that such a marker is only a hint, which says that the response will very likely take a long time. This is not to say that async apis cannot be layered over sync transport or vice versa. This isn't about the binding/transport, it is about providing a hint to the WSDL processor. I.e., one can use an async portType level maker and use the default SOAP/HTTP binding that uses a single connection. On the flip side one is also not prevented from using an non-async req-res abstract operation from being bound to an async SMTP binding. Such a marker allows the WSDL processor, if it chooses to do so, to generate client-side APIs/programming model that takes into account that the request and response is separated potentially by a large time interval. I would therefore like to propose an addendum to Marc's proposal [1] -- we allow an attribute called wsaw:Async of type xs:boolean (restricted to the value 'true') on the wsdl11:portType, wsdl11:portType/wsdl1:operation, wsdl20:interface, wsdl20:interface/wsdl20:operation element. The presence of this attribute is a hint to the WSDL processor that the response and request MAY be separated by a large time interval. -Anish -- [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Nov/0003.html
Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 04:17:37 UTC