W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2004

Re: 2004-02-12 Action Item: Clarification to the OperationName feature

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:27:12 -0500
Message-ID: <034701c3fa19$214b1140$7b00a8c0@AURORA>
To: "Jim Webber" <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>, "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hi Jim:

>> But as I think I must have said before, you seem to be trying
>> to make WSDL be something that it isn't.  That may or may not
>> be a good thing to do, but every use of WSDL I've seen uses
>> it describe application interfaces, so that's where my
>> comments are coming from.
> I'm not trying to make WSDL anything else, it already is a message
> description langauge. Some people like to think that it describes this
> mythical application, but I see no justifcation for that. The
> "application" that receives a message described in WSDL might be a
> human reading a fax. How does that tie in with an operation?

OK, let's start this way.  Why do we bother with <operation> at all in WSDL?

Received on Monday, 23 February 2004 09:36:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:38 UTC