- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 16:48:44 +0200
- To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- CC: www-ws-desc@w3.org, Glen Daniels <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
So far, the only two SOAP MEPs we have (well, one and a half, really) are between two nodes only. IMO, we should be able to model such simple MEPs in WSDL. Jean-Jacques. Jacek Kopecky wrote: > Jean-Jacques, > IMO in WSDL the term MEP is a bit different from SOAP MEP. The > difference is that in SOAP an MEP may span multiple nodes and is > defined from the point of view of a message, whereas WSDL > describes one node and all MEPs used in WSDL must be defined from > the point of view of that one described node. > In WSDL, other MEPs than one-way and request/response should > IMHO be viewed as orchestration, out of scope of WSDL. Therefore > we can hardcode these two. > Best regards, > > Jacek Kopecky > > Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation > http://www.systinet.com/ > > On Fri, 24 May 2002, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote: > > > I was not able to attend yesterday, and I apologize in advance if > > I am reiterating a discussion that has occured already, but I > > wanted to point out that I agree with Glen and that, if possible, > > MEPs should not be hardcoded into the spec. > > > > Specifically, SOAP 1.2 currently defines one MEP. It is expected > > that specification for other MEPs will be produced in the future. > > I think it would be desirable that these other MEPs can be > > described in WSDL, otherwise there will be services out there > > that cannot be described (and hence used). It would be desirable > > if these other MEPs can be described without us reopening the > > whole spec every time. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Jean-Jacques. > >
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 10:50:24 UTC