- From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:23:07 -0800
- To: Sandeep Kumar <sandkuma@cisco.com>
- CC: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Sandeep (et al), WSDL 1.1 in its current form is designed to be a language used by the provider of the service to unilaterally describe the service (interfaces, bindings, access-points etc.). I can see extending this to accommodate specification of different levels of QoS (say at different access points) by the provider. However, "Service Contract Binding" implies to me a "contract/agreement between two are more parties". Regards, Prasad Yendluri --------------------------------------------------------------- Principal Architect, ATG; webMethods Inc., 432 Lakeside Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3793, USA Tel: (408) 962-5226 mailto: pyendluri@webmethods.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Sandeep Kumar wrote: > Hi, > > In today's meeting, we had a discussion on *bindings* and we agreed upon, > *InterfaceBinding*. I like that as well. > > We were also discussing about a broader notion of binding, such QoS etc., > and it was felt that it is one of the *significant* features that we can add > to WSDL 1.1. > > I wonder if Service Contract Binding would be a better term or an "extension > point" for such meta-level concepts. > > Thanks, > Sandeep Kumar > Cisco Systems
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 14:20:16 UTC