- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:15:04 +0100
- To: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Mark, > > BTW, in case it helps explain the issue, I should clarify that by using > this style of message, the client can have no expectation that the quote > will be returned on the response to the "MSFT" message, because to have > such an expectation would be assuming a contract with "getStockQuote" > (*not* processMessage) semantics and would therefore have the same > non-self-descriptive problems as the other approach I'm critiquing. > I don't think we are disagreeing here. To expect that just because the operation is called "getStockQuote" you'll get the semantics which may implied by the human-readable name (without actually going into a specification and reading about the intentions of the service-providers) I think is incorrect. All you can expect is structural compliance to the service's description of the messages being exchanged. Perhaps we should come up with a language called WSSL (WS Semantics Language) to accompany WSDL (WS Description Language). > Note that Jim and Savas and I have talked about this extensively, but > they still disagree with me. > Yes! You are wrong and we are right :-))) (just joking of course) Regards, .savas.
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2004 13:15:38 UTC