- From: <jones@research.att.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:32:32 -0400 (EDT)
- To: chrisfer@us.ibm.com, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Chris, I see the MEP as a fundamental construct that relates an initial message and its possible response message(s). In the context of SOAP, this is a pattern that gets supported by a binding which tends to view things from the perspective of interacting nodes. Protocol binding specs "declare their support for one or more named MEPs". In the context of WSDL, an MEP is viewed from the perspective of the nodes themselves. The SOAP definition occurs in the context of the SOAP spec with its binding framework. Even in that context, it probably should have been tightened up a bit, but it certainly needs some qualification in our spec since we are in a more general context. I think that David Booth was trying to capture a more WSDL-centric view of an MEP with the phrase "a single use of the service". For example, the SOAP Req/Resp MEP looks like an in-out pattern at the operation level from the perspective of the ultimateReceiver. I personally find the SOAP view of an MEP more coherent. The problem with the WSDL operation perspective is that a single, simple SOAP request/response MEP ends up having complementary WSDL operation patterns for each endpoint in a peer-to-peer environment -- an out-in at the initial sender and an in-out at the ultimateReceiver. But these operations are not formally related to each other in the WSDL framework. The SOAP view provides that coherence. What about the following definition: A message exchange pattern is a template for the exchange of messages between agents that arise from a message and its responses, if any. Is that any better? By the way, I don't think we want to say that choreography isn't concerned with patterns. They can be MEPPs -- MEP Patterns! Mark Jones AT&T To: www-ws-arch@w3.org From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 16:36:25 -0400 Subject: Re: section 2.2.22 Message Exchange Pattern (MEP) Mark, I am still uncertain as to what "a single use of the service" means in this, or any context. A service may have many operations, and fulfilment of the service may require more than one of the operations to be invoked by the client. Given this, where does the SOAP Req/Resp MEP come into play? I believe that WSD WG is mapping MEP at the operation level and hence at the very least, we should be aligning our definition with that notion. I agree that it is important to distinguish between an MEP and a choreographed exchange of messages, one is a pattern (the P in MEP) and the other is not. SOAP1.2[1] defines an MEP as: A Message Exchange Pattern (MEP) is a template that establishes a pattern for the exchange of messages between SOAP nodes. Why isn't that definition good enough for us? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapmep Cheers, Christopher Ferris STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com phone: +1 508 234 3624
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2003 11:32:25 UTC