- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:52:53 +0600
- To: "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: "'WS Description List'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
"Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com> writes: > > The crux of the matter is whether WSDL is a contract definition language (it > specifies documents), or an object IDL. I think the former, though it has > consistently been abused as the latter. It defines documents which some may choose to interpret as object serializations. What's the problem with that? "Abused" is a strong word for describing an interpretation that most implementations have of the XML documents that are described in WSDL: eventually these become data structures in a programming language and a Java object is a lot more Java programmer friendly than a DOM tree. That does not make WSDL an object IDL. Sanjiva.
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 11:53:18 UTC