- From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 17:58:31 +0100
- To: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: member-ws-chor-request@w3.org [mailto:member-ws-chor-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gary Brown Sent: 14 September 2004 12:36 To: WS-Choreography Working Group; Charlton Barreto Subject: Re: Proposal on WSDL 1.1 vs WSDL 2.0 MEPs Hi Charlton, Looks good to me. The only comment is on the last para: "A wsdl version element should be introduced to the CDL schema to signify whether a CDL supports wsdl 1.1 or wsdl 2.0. A CDL parser can use this element to determine for the choreography environment whether to load facilities to support wsdl 1.1 or 2.0." Not sure if it is necessary for the CDL schema to explicitly specify a WSDL version, as the binding to a particular WSDL service definition would just need to be validated by the parser, to ensure that the interactions in the CDL specification are implemented by the associated WSDL operations. For example, if the CDL has an interaction with a request and response exchange elements, then the parser would just need to ensure that the bound WSDL operation was either a WSDL 1.1 request-response, or a WSDL2 in-out or in-optional-out. Similarly a CDL interaction with just a request could be mapped to WSDL1.1 one-way, or a WSDL 2 in-only or in-optional-out. Regards Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlton Barreto" <charlton_b@mac.com> To: "WS-Choreography Working Group" <member-ws-chor@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 8:11 AM Subject: Proposal on WSDL 1.1 vs WSDL 2.0 MEPs > Attached is my proposal on resolving wsdl 1.1 and 2.0 MEPs in CDL. Any > feedback you have on this is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > > -Charlton. > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2004 16:59:06 UTC