- From: Fred Carter <fred.carter@amberpoint.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:23:44 -0700
- To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Thus quoth Sergey Beryozkin (~ 20-Jun-03 5:19 AM ~)... > Sorry for asking what likely is a trivial question, but : > > >>>Can a client processing service d1 and d2 descriptions to avail of this >>>targetResource attribute in any way ? >> >>Sure- to realize that d1 and d2 both have something on common: they >>are both services that mess around with the same resource. > > So, for example, a client sees a printer service which can print a document > to a printer (identified by a targetResource), and also sees a printer > management service which can manage the same targetResource. > I can't see at the moment how the client can utilize this information. Say, > a client now can set up a printer first before sending a document to print ? > But wouldn't a client be able to do the same if there were two services > descriptions available (printer and printer manager) but without a > @targetResource ? > > Thanks ! > Sergey Beryozkin > [...] Suppose there are two interfaces, printing & printermgmt. Printing contains the operation "print" which returns a job id. printermgmt contains, amongst others, the cancelJob operation. If I print to some print endpiing with a targetResource and later decide to cancel it, I need to know which thing on which to perform the cancelJob operation. In this case, the 'targetResource' identifies the printing subsystem. Depending upon the enterprise's choices, this may be a server, a printer, a farm of printers in some room with a common manager or spooler, whatever -- we don't know. We just know that two endpoints employing these interfaces refer to the same 'collected stuff' -- that identified by the 'targetResource'. (Arguments about bad interface decisions are not terribly relevant. There will always be cases where there are different interfaces.) If, OTOH, one could put the 'printing' and 'printermgmt' interfaces into the same service, this wouldn't be a problem. But it is in the current thinking. IMHO: This issue exists ONLY because of the "service contains a single interface" decision. -- Fred Carter / AmberPoint, Inc. mailto:fred.carter@amberpoint.com tel:+1.510.433.6525 fax:+1.510.663.6301
Received on Friday, 20 June 2003 14:23:48 UTC