RE: Synthesis of the proposals for issue 64

+1 on both the summary by Jacek and the point by Mark below.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 10:47 PM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Re: Synthesis of the proposals for issue 64



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 Monday, 21 July 2003 10:10:12 UTC