- From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:36:54 -0500
- To: <public-ws-async-tf@w3.org>
[In fulfillment of AI from last week]
* Description
This case involves a synchronous request/response operation which is
implemented by using a transport binding's native back-channel.
* Can we achieve with current specs?
Yes. This is the most common case in Web Services to date. Example:
...
<wsdl:interface name="Ticker">
<wsdl:operation name="getStockQuote">
<wsdl:input element="tns:getStockQuote"/>
<wsdl:output element="tns:quote"/>
</wsdl:operation>
</wsdl:interface>
<wsdl:binding name="TickerBinding"
interface="tns:Ticker"
wsoap:protocol="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP">
<wsdl:operation ref="getStockQuote"
wsoap:mep="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/request-response"/>
</wsdl:binding>
...
This would result in the standard "WSDL request -> HTTP request, WSDL
response -> HTTP response" pattern. Note that any other SOAP binding
might be substituted for the
http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP URI, as long as that
binding supported the SOAP request/response MEP. For example, I might
have written an email binding which uses the email Message-ID: and
Reply-To: headers in order to do correlation at the binding level.
Despite the "asynchrony" at the actual transport level (SMTP out, POP3
or IMAP in), the binding surfaces the request-response MEP as if it were
synchronous.
* Minimal change necessary to support?
No changes necessary.
* Ideal solution with no restrictions on changes?
Binding a WSDL in/out to any underlying protocol which supports req/resp
directly is about as simple as it could be already.
--Glen
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 16:37:07 UTC