W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > September 2004

FW: Proposal on WSDL 1.1 vs WSDL 2.0 MEPs

From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 17:58:31 +0100
To: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <006801c49a7c$107b1320$2cae2382@ie.oracle.com>

-----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



----- 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:27 UTC