RE: proposal for restricting a service to a single interface

> Motivation is simple: Simplification.

+1 to that!

I like this proposal, they key words that Sanjiva put in there were "dramatically simplify the binding stuff".

Music to my ears!!!

--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development

-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 6:45 PM
To: Martin Gudgin; www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Re: proposal for restricting a service to a single interface


Motivation is simple: Simplification.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 5:46 PM
Subject: RE: proposal for restricting a service to a single interface


> 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 Thursday, 24 April 2003 11:07:56 UTC