- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:02:26 -0400
- To: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Yes Ugo, that's correct, and a good example too. Thanks for digging it up. I think you'll find that many (most? all?) server side frameworks have something equivalent. Like I just said to Kevin, the contract is the same whether or not the operation's in the message, in the WSDL, both, or neither. On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 12:11:32PM -0700, Ugo Corda wrote: > I think Mark was referring to the common practice of establishing a > close connection between the operation name and the corresponding agent > implementation. For instance, Java's JAX-RPC 1.1 says (WSDL to Java > mapping): > > 4.3.4 WSDL Operation > A wsdl:operation defined in a wsdl:portType maps to a Java method on the > mapped Java service endpoint interface. [...] A wsdl:operation is named > by the name attribute. The operation name maps to the name of the > corresponding method on the mapped Java service endpoint interface. > > and also (Java to WSDL mapping): > > 5.5.3 Service Endpoint Interface > A service endpoint interface (that extends java.rmi.Remote) is mapped to > the wsdl:portType element. [...] Methods defined in a service endpoint > interface are mapped to the wsdl:operation definitions in the > corresponding wsdl:portType.
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2004 16:04:50 UTC