- From: Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin@zandar.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 16:48:28 +0100
- To: "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Hello, I'd just like to return again to the question of whether dynamic bindings should be disallowed by the proposal[1]or not. Proposal [1] says @binding attribute is declared statically in the WSDL document, this probably covers the majority of cases. How practical/usefult would it be to add @binding optional attribute to the endpoint reference definition : <wsdl:endpoint name="partURI" part="return" xpath="/p:Parts/Part/@xlink:href" interface="tns:partInterface" binding="dynamic"/> @binding attribute can have 2 values, "static" (default) and "dynamic". When @binding is "dynamic", the runtime *may*, but has not to, try to retrieve a binding definition from the newly created URI (perhaps with an extra path/request parameter to indicate that it's not the representation which is requested). If dynamic binding discovery is not attempted/fails, a binding statically referenced (as shown in [1]) will be used. If dynamic binding is used then a wsdl doc is returned. This returned wsdl must contain a binding for a given interface (probably identified the way shown in [1]), and may/should also contain a <service> element. One issue here is that the returned wsdl has to know about portTypes/interfaces referenced in the original wsdl doc, and a such, these portTypes must be grouped in a separate WSDL doc. Thanks Sergey Beryozkin [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Apr/att-0088/R085-2003-0 4-22.html
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 11:48:20 UTC