W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-state@w3.org > July 2003

RE: attributes in CORBA IDL

From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 08:42:58 +0100
Message-ID: <1057787714.IAA22192@phantom.w3.org>
To: "Jeff Mischkinsky" <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>, "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-state@w3.org>, "Steve Graham" <sggraham@us.ibm.com>



> This really is very simple and straightforward. Don't keep trying to
> complicate it by bringing in other definitions of what attributes may
> may not be or mean.

I completely agree with what you said in both of your messages. We have
the same understanding of what the keyword "attribute" means in IDL.
However, I feel that I need to explain what I mean when I talk about
"specific operations".

The entire conversation started when I suggested that, as in the IDL
specification, the WSDL specification cannot mandate the existence of
specific operations (i.e., explicit signatures for methods and/or
attributes). This task force is to contribute a section in the WSDL
specification and as such it can only talk about the syntax on how to
write interfaces and not the existence of a number of specific
operations in all defined interfaces.

In OGSI, there are three operations defined: setServiceDAta,
getServiceData, findServiceData. It was my understanding that the
intention was to define such operations in WSDL. That's what I objected
to. I mentioned IDL as an example because IDL says nothing about
specific operations. I did not say that the keyword "attribute" does not
suggest the existence of an appropriate mechanism for get/set in the
target language. Just that the IDL specification does not mandate the
existence of particular operations with predefined semantics, like "list
findAttributeByName(string)" for example.

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2003 03:43:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:32:54 UTC