- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 00:08:33 -0700
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> > the WSDL spec needs to be clear that the semantics of the contract are > PUT, and not putStockQuote. i.e. a successful response from > a document > being submitted to that endpoint, only means that PUT was invoked, not > that putStockQuote was invoked. Perhaps making name optional would be > useful, and discouraging its use when "webMethod" is used?? Dunno. > As I said earlier, just because the "webMethod" is set to PUT does not mean that the actual protocol method used in the binding is PUT. PUT is the constrained/generic semantics at the abstract level, but the realization may be different. Case in point is Atom. I had suggested at one point that the "name" could be optional, but I know believe that would be a bad decision. The name is the identifier for the relationship between inputs, outputs, faults, and optionally generic operations. I think naming these things and being able to refer to them is good. Cheers, Dave
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2004 03:08:36 UTC