- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 17:49:33 +0100
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- CC: www-ws@w3.org
Dan, There are now a couple of examples of SOAP features[1,2,3]. I don't quite think they would qualify as a Policy as defined by WS-Arch. However, Glen Daniels recently gave a presentation[4] on features to WS-Arch. Jean-jacques. [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part2.html#WebMethodFeature [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/07/SOAP-AF/aftf-soap-af.html [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-soap12-email-20020626#correlation [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Nov/0085.html Dan Brickley wrote: > On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote: >>Would this not be covered adequately by a new SOAP feature[1] ? > > Quite possibly. To be honest, I don't know (but I'd like to find out). > The current text introduces the notion of a 'feature' through evocative > examples rather than definition. I'm not sure quite what would count as a > 'extension' to the SOAP messaging framework, rather than say a > 'characterisation' of the capabilities and characteristics of some > particular class of Web Services. > > [[ > For the purpose of this specification, the term "feature" is used to > identify an extension of the SOAP messaging framework typically associated > with the exchange of messages between communicating SOAP nodes. Although > SOAP poses no constraints on the potential scope of such features, example > features include "reliability", "security", "correlation", and > "routing". > ]] > > I'd be happy to use SOAP 'features' to classify Web Services that are > variations on the theme of database lookups, though from this text it > isn't immediately clear that this is appropriate. On the one hand, the > SOAP has no hard constraints that stop us from using the 'feature' > feature; on the other, these examples seem to be focussed mostly on the > machinery of communicating with some Service, rather than on > characterising the (meaning/purpose/etc of) facilities offered by that > Service. > > I guess there's more than one way to do it, which is often fine. Maybe > this is a point that the Web Services Architecture doc might offer advice > on? > > [time passes... skimming specs...] > > Looking at http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-arch-20021114/#descstack it > seems my interests live in what the ws-arch doc calls the 'policy' layer, > under '3.3.3.1 Descriptions Applying to a Particular Web Service': > > [[ > 3.3.3.1.3 Policy > > Policy for Web services consists of facts, or assertions, and rules that > apply to a particular Web service. The policy may be associated with an > interface (portType), a binding of that interface to a protocol, or a > service instance. Policy would be used to describe or point to documents > describing the owning business, associated products, keywords, taxonomies > for the service, security policies, quality of service attributes, etc. > Policy may be used by the over-arching concerns: security, quality of > service, and management; as well as higher layers of the description > stack. > ]] > > Are SOAP features considered to be Policies in this sense? Maybe ws-arch > could mention the relationship? eg. a cross-reference from the Policies > section to the discussion of Features at > http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-arch-20021114/#features > SOAP currently says that the specification of a feature must include... > > "A URI used to name the feature. This enables the feature to be > unambiguously referenced in description languages or > during negotiation." > > This hints at a connection between these two aspects of WS architecture, > but doesn't provide the details. I'm not sure where I'd go for the > details (which working group, which spec(s), ...). WSDL or the WSDL SOAP > Binding? http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-wsdl12-bindings-20020709/#_soap-b > > Sorry for all the questions... I'm trying to get a feel for how > all these things fit together. Maybe I should just try creating a Feature > and see whether it seems a good fit for the problem. > > cheers, > > dan > > >>Jean-Jacques. >> >>[1] >>http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.html#soapfeature >> >>Dan Brickley wrote: >> >>>www-ws, >>> >>>I was looking again at the registry of (public) SOAP Web Services at >>>http://www.xmethods.com/ and was struck (again) by the fact that many, >>>perhaps most, of these services appear to be based around database >>>queries, ie. they return a single item or list of items corresponding to >>>record(s) picked out by the argument(s) passed in the SOAP request. >>> >>>Lottery results given a region and date. Car rental quotes given a query >>>specification. Zipcode to lat/long mappings. Searches against Shakespeare >>>etexts. Telephone codes from city names. Weather forecasts from zipcodes. >>>Book data given ISBN. Whois lookups. Population size given countrycode. >>> >>>etc etc. You get the idea. SELECT/FROM/WHERE-esque use cases. >>> >>>So I'm interested in whether this recurring pattern of Web Service >>>deployment can be captured for machine use, or less ambitiously, whether >>>anyone has offered a more careful analysis than mine of the ways in which >>>real live SOAP services are being deployed in the public Web as a way of >>>exposing database lookup facilities. I'd like to be able to consult a >>>database of SOAP services and pick out those which offer such lookup-based >>>information services. I'd like to know which of those have an interaction >>>pattern that typically returns a list of 'hits' versus which return a >>>single 'hit'. I'd like to know how each service represents a search with >>>zero hits versus a search that fails for some other reason (malformed >>>query; database temporarily down etc.). >>> >>>Basically it strikes me that there is a lot of hidden commonality across >>>these lookup-based Web services, and that there would be significant >>>benefit to having machine-friendly characterisations of aspects of that >>>commonality. Many of them are probably thin wrappers for SQL queries and >>>ODBC/JDBC/DBI anyway. My current understanding of WSDL and the Web Service >>>Description effort is that it would support richer >>>description/classification of these services, but doesn't come with innate >>>support for representing these. >>> >>>Um, I guess I'm rambling now. The purpose of this mail was to enquire >>>whether folk on www-ws could point me to any work on classifying >>>query/lookup based SOAP services, eg. using WSDL extensions, RDF/DAML-S etc. >>> >>>Thanks for any pointers, >>> >>>Dan >>> >>>ps. this is related to my earlier enquiry about the use of W3C's XQuery >>>for Web Service discovery, see thread beginning >>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws/2002Jul/0001.html >>> >>> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 19 November 2002 11:50:05 UTC