- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:46:53 -0700
- To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
I must confess to not really understanding the motivation behind this proposal. It seems to me that people that want a service to implement but a single interface can define such a service today using our current spec. And those that want a service to implement multiple interfaces can also do that today. I'm not sure why we would want to remove one of these capabilities. Gudge > > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana > Sent: 21 April 2003 23:40 > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > > > Following up on the action item I have, I'd like to propose > the following: > > - Require all <port>s within a <service> element to implement > exactly the same interface. Thus, each <port> is an alternate > implementation of the same interface. > - The interface will be indicated with a new attribute: > <service interface="qname"> ... </service> > - As with any interface in WSDL 1.2, this interface could > have extended any number of other interfaces. > > I will soon send the updated binding proposal which takes > this into account to dramatically simplify the binding stuff. > If this doesn't get accepted then I'll re-do the binding proposal. > > Sanjiva. > > >
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2003 17:47:03 UTC