W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2002

Re: Fw: issue: service type

From: <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:03:41 -0400
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: "WS-Desc WG \(Public\)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF96B14ABB.266BB94C-ON85256BD4.0052269E@torolab.ibm.com>


I think it's ok for a WSDL document to have more than one <service>
elements. However, I think it is confusing to have a <service> implement
semantically different <port>s. I think the concept of a service would have
greater cohesion if the multiple ports were simply different ways to access
the same underlying service. Each port would be an alternate way, differing
perhaps in just the protocol used. That way the client can select any port
it understands and get the same result. The current WSDL forces you to
define different portTypes because of problems in the binding definitions
(e.g. one for SOAP/HTTP, one for HTTP POST). If this is fixed, then the
rule should be that all ports in a service implement the same portType. Or
if the serviceType proposal is accepted, then all ports in a service
implement the same serviceType (here I assume the portTypes in a
serviceType really define different sets of operations, i.e. they are not
just to accomodate different protocols).

Arthur Ryman

                    Weerawarana"           To:     "WS-Desc WG \(Public\)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>                                 
                    <sanjiva@watson.       cc:                                                                                  
                    ibm.com>               Subject:     Fw: issue: service type                                                 
                    Sent by:                                                                                                    
                    06/04/2002 03:47                                                                                            
                    Please respond                                                                                              
                    to "Sanjiva                                                                                                 

I posted this a while back, but there was literally no discussion
that I can recall. Is this issue so boring??

Also related is the following:
    <issue id="issue-multiple-services">
      <head>Should a single WSDL file only define one service?</head>
      WSDL 1.1 suppports having multiple services in a single WSDL
      file. This has caused confusion amongst users.
      <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>

Anyone with opinions or can I resolve it myself? ;-)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 6:29 AM
Subject: issue: service type

> I would like to open discussion on the following issue:
> <issue id="issue-service-type">
>   <head>Should we have an abstract view of a service?</head>
>   WSDL defines a service as a collection of ports, but there is no
>   abstract analog.
>   <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>
> </issue>
> Sanjiva.
Received on Monday, 10 June 2002 11:06:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:23 UTC