- From: Jon Dart <jdart@tibco.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 11:22:16 -0700
- To: "Cummins Fred A" <fred.cummins@eds.com>
- CC: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>, "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com>, public-ws-chor@w3.org
N.b. "service type" was removed from the WSDL 1.2 draft some time ago. IMO we should align ourselves with how WSDL 1.2 describes things. --Jon Cummins, Fred A wrote: > > Assav wrote: > > >>>>WSDL interface defines some of the expected behavior of a >>>>service type >>>>and WS-Chor defines other part of that behavior. WSDL can >>>>also define an >>>>interface beloning to that type by associating it with the >> >>interface. >> >>>>However, somewhere along the actual concept of service type >>>>managed to >>>>escape and I think we need to introduce it in more generic >> >>terms than >> >>>>the particular type of WSDL definition used to capture its behavior. >>>> >>>> >>> >>>[fac] Is your intent to attach some additional semantics to a service >>>type? If not, what will distinguish one service type from >> >>another if not >> >>>the WSDL and choreography? >>> >>> >> >>If you think about it, WSDL is just a type definition language for >>services. It defines generic types (interfaces) and actual >>instances of >>these types (services). I can say that some choreography can use any >>service that implements interface X, or simply that it can use any >>service of that type. So service type is just a more generic >>term and a >>WSDL interface is just part of the definition of that type. >> >>The only need to generalize this concept a bit is by allow different >>defintions of the service type to exist without naming this >>particular >>definitions. >> > > This seems like a rather imprecise definition. How do you > expect to use "service type?" If it is used within a choreography > specification, I would expect it to refer to a WSDL interface, or > something more specific, such as a real estate seller using a > seller interface. > > Fred > > >
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2003 14:22:25 UTC