Re: equivalence of interface operations

Sakata-san,

In WSDL 1.2 you cannot override an inherited operation by giving it 
different input or output. If you want to reuse an operation name then you 
must use a different namespace. The use of the same local name of the 
operation is just a hint to the client that the new operation is related 
to the inherited operation. There is no formal significance or semantics 
associated with the names.

Arthur Ryman




sakatayu@nttdata.co.jp
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
07/03/2003 02:59 AM

 
        To:     Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
        cc:     www-ws-desc@w3.org
        Subject:        Re: equivalence of interface operations

 



>You are asking for operator overloading, i.e. the ability to distinguish
>operations that have the same name but different inputs. The WG decided
>to not allow that. 
>
>If you have a logical operation that can take different inputs, then you
>can model it as one operation that takes a complex type based on
><choice>. [1] 
>
>[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0142.html

Thank you for your reply.
I have understood the WG solution for my question.
However, please allow me to ask one more question I face.
I think "<choice>" solution  is very smart, but I'm afraid of the case 
that an interface extends the other interface, and an operation of the 
extened interface is required to add (or change) inputs which the super 
interface doesn't have.

In WSDL 1.2 concept, in this case, should we define the different 
operation though the original operation and re-difined one are same 
semantically? Or have you disucussed a solution?

Regards,
----------------------------------------------
NTT Data Corporation
Yuji Sakata
E-Mail: sakatayu@nttdata.co.jp
----------------------------------------------