- From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:13:41 +0100
- To: Joao Paulo Andrade Almeida <almeida@cs.utwente.nl>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
* Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com> [2002-11-29 10:29-0500] > > Services described in WSDL 1.1 are not identified by a URI. > > Instead, each port of a service is identified by a URI. > > > > Is this intentional? Have I interpreted the definition > > correctly? > > I can't speak for the working group's intention vis a vis WSDL 1.1. > Nevertheless, the general purpose of the definition is to look forward to a > "reference architecture" incorporating WSDL 1.2 than to be backward > compatible with everything we now think of as a "web service". This does > not mean that WSDL 1.1 can't be used to describe "web services", just that > it is best practice to use URIs whenever feasible to identify web service > components so as to maximize compatibility and interoperability with the > rest of the Web. WSDL 1.2 adopts this perspective. I would add that I don't think that WSDL 1.1 prevents the identification of a service with a URI. It says[1] that a service is "[a collection] of network endpoints, or ports", which are each identified by a URI. It just is silent about whether a service would be identified by a URI or not, and therefore does expose one. Regards, Hugo 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl-20010315#_introduction -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 10:13:44 UTC