- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 22:46:46 -0400
- To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Hi Jacek, On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 09:47:06AM +0200, Jacek Kopecky wrote: > In WSDL, especially in the HTTP binding with URL replacement, we seem to > be modeling things that are greater than single HTTP resources. In HTTP > services, the model has a bunch of related resources and hypermedia as > the state machine, where high-level application operations are performed > by various transitions and invoking the HTTP methods. In WSDL, we model > the high-level operations and group them into Interfaces. That's a brilliant summary, Jacek. > Therefore the HTTP application-protocol interface is not really > applicable as WSDL interface, as describing a single HTTP resource is > less than what WSDL wants to accomplish in one Interface. Whoa! I don't understand that. By that logic, a stock quote retrieval interface isn't applicable as a WSDL interface, because one can always develop a stock portfolio management interface which encapsulates it. You said it yourself; WSDL describes interfaces, and HTTP defines one. I think the conclusion is pretty clear. And remember, this is all to define *extended* functionality for people who want to define RESTful services. My proposal respects the common use of WSDL, and for those that aren't defining RESTful services, it's totally business-as-usual; they need not ever know that this functionality exists. Thanks. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 22:40:38 UTC