W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > October 2002

RE: Spec draft

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 08:17:09 -0700
Message-ID: <C513FB68F8200244B570543EF3FC65370A855B78@MAIL1.stc.com>
To: "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "'Damodaran Suresh'" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org

I strongly disagree that the spec implies that the Request-Response MEP is
synchronous by nature. (Just a couple of days ago you said that the
JMS-based asynchronous Request-Response scenario I brought up is perfectly
consistent with the spec). 

I also believe that message-based asynchronous Request-Response MEPs will be
central to the successful application of Web services to EAI and B2B.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 12:42 AM
To: Ugo Corda
Cc: 'Damodaran Suresh'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: Spec draft

I think the implication of the current text:

    "The SOAP RPC Representation employs the
     6.2 SOAP Request-Response Message Exchange Pattern and
     6.3 SOAP Response Message Exchange Pattern. Use of
     the SOAP RPC Representation with other MEPs MAY be possible,
     but is beyond the scope of this specification."

is that RPC in SOAP 1.2 *as described by the spec* is essentially 
synchronous -because of the synchronous nature of the Req-Resp 
and SOAP-Resp MEPs. The extension of the spec to other, 
asynchronous MEPs, is left as an exercise to the reader.


Ugo Corda wrote:
> As far as I can see, SOAP and WSDL focus only on the type of operation 
> signature associated with the RPC style (see for example WSDL 1.2, 
> section 2.5), and don't say anything to the effect that the RPC style 
> should be synchronous. If you see any implication to that in any of 
> those specs, please point it out to me.
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2002 11:17:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:05:41 UTC