- 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