- From: Damodaran, Suresh <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 15:50:33 -0500
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
An analysis of BPEL (might help to position it with BPSS) http://www.ebpml.org/bpel4ws.htm Comparison of BPML & BPEL http://www.ebpml.org/A_Comparison_of_XPDL_and_BPML_BPEL.doc Cheers, -Suresh Sterling Commerce (on loan to RosettaNet) -----Original Message----- From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@prescod.net] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:55 PM To: Ugo Corda Cc: 'Champion, Mike'; www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Re: Article on WS architecture and best practice ... may be of in terest Ugo Corda wrote: >>this methodology >>defeats the whole purpose of Web services, which is to hide the >>implementation of a service completely behind an XML-based interface. >>VS.NET generates the interface from the implementation. > > > I don't see the conflict here. For any user of the Web service the generated > interface does exactly that: hides the original implementation. > > If the point made by the article is that Web services interfaces should be > defined first and implementations should follow, this is evidently not > possible in all those cases where Web services are used as wrappers for > legacy implementations. I think that the point is that the web service's interfaces should be designed to make it into a good network application which could be radically different than the appropriate interfaces for a LAN-based or desktop software component for all of the reasons described in the "Waldo paper" and elsewhere. If you are just letting software "generate" your network interface from a pre-existing interface then the chances it is optimal as a network application is tiny. Paul
Received on Thursday, 3 October 2002 16:51:53 UTC