- From: Jim Webber <jim.webber@arjuna.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 15:44:47 +0100
- To: "'David Snelling'" <d.snelling@fle.fujitsu.com>, <public-ws-desc-state@w3.org>
David: I worry that including these kind of mechanisms will turn WSDL into the XML equivalent of C++ header files, and that as a result developers make bad decisions about the granularity of service interactions. If we move away from the idea of WSDL as an IDL, and think about WSDL as a protocol description language then I believe that things like this constant/static mechanism are unnecessary (since we use WSDL to describe message format and binding, and not the interface of an agent per se). In fact if we look at things this way, the notion of a stateful service becomes much less the domain of the protocol description and much more a feature of a particular deployed architecture. All the protocol description would have to ensure is that the right contexts are passed around to ensure that state can be rehydrated in response to the receipt of messages. Jim
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2003 10:45:00 UTC