- From: Sedukhin, Igor <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 10:07:12 -0500
- To: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
Thanks, Jeff. Here is my comment on >R097: I'd suggest change it to "Must". (Now, this is NOT covered by R036!) >[jeffsch: I agree that this is part of a general Web Service definition, >but I don't agree that this is appropriate to describe in WSDL; >it seems to border on orchestration.] I believe that description of operation and thus characteristics of operation are part of WSDL. Whether it is used for orchestration or otherwise does not matter. Sync/Async and expected response latency is a characteristic of the operation itself rather than flow definition. In fact, I envision other use for R097 than just orchestration. For example, I may have a UI app running on wireless device that would switch to alert mode if operation is async and the expected reply latency is more than, say, 10 seconds. R097 adds a lot to the ability to create intelligent apps using WSs. I'd suggest making it a must for WSDL 2.0. -- Igor Sedukhin .. (Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com) -- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788 -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Schlimmer [mailto:jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:21 PM To: www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements Igor, thank you for the clarification. Comments and questions below in [square brackets]. --Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Sedukhin, Igor [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 3:30 PM To: Jeffrey Schlimmer; www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements I'd like to suggest the following changes to the reqs that I have initially submitted: R093: please move it to section "4.5 Messages and Types". [jeffsch: Done.] R096: It says (Merged in R085.). From the existing wording of R085 I don't exactly see how they were merged. I suggest either rephrase R085 to clearly state the requirement to cover references to other services or leave R096 if the intention of R085 is different. [jeffsch: Removed the recommendation to reject R096 and removed modification from R085.] R094: It is covered by R036. Can be rejected for that reason. [jeffsch: Done.] R097: I'd suggest change it to "Must". (Now, this is NOT covered by R036!) [jeffsch: I agree that this is part of a general Web Service definition, but I don't agree that this is appropriate to describe in WSDL; it seems to border on orchestration.] -- Igor Sedukhin .. (Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com) -- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788
Received on Friday, 5 April 2002 10:07:44 UTC