- From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:39:47 -0500
- To: Steve Graham <sggraham@us.ibm.com>, public-ws-desc-state@w3.org
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
+1, well said. My only comment is that your point (c) isn't strictly true, as you could always just attach such metadata to the operations or even the schema. But I completely agree with your conclusion. I think that the service state and management space is a very interesting one, and there are some simple and powerful things that can be done there, things which seem like perfect candidates for WSDL extensions. --Glen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Graham" <sggraham@us.ibm.com> To: <public-ws-desc-state@w3.org> Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:35 PM Subject: Attributes in WSDL > > > > > > All: > I do not agree with the direction we are taking with attributes in WSDL 2.0 > working group. My reasons include: > > a) Forcing the designer to use Get/Set operation pairs to denote attributes > results in a model of very fine grained access. > b) The approach is quite complicated, this reduces the > functionality/capability of tools to support this approach ubiquitously. > c) The approach does not allow/support addition of policy/meta-data > specifically associated with the attributes. > > Therefore I request that the WSDL WG reconsider its position on attributes > and terminate this line of activity. The concept of attributes in Web > services should be done in another venue that would allow a simpler and > more complete treatment of this concept. > > sgg > ++++++++ > Steve Graham > (919)254-0615 (T/L 444) > STSM, On Demand Architecture > Member, IBM Academy of Technology > <Soli Deo Gloria/> > ++++++++ > >
Received on Thursday, 30 October 2003 17:39:51 UTC