- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 08:25:29 -0400
- To: www-ws@w3.org
Let's say you have a WSDL document which describes some service, and a client and server hardcoded to that WSDL. Visibility, as an architectural property, refers to the ability of a third party component to monitor interactions between other components.[1] So which of these third parties would you say is better able to monitor the interactions between the aforementioned client and server? A. A generic SOAP/XML intermediary B. An intermediary hardcoded to the WSDL document above C. An intermediary hardcoded to some other WSDL document I suggest that B has vastly superior visibility to A or C. [1] http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/net_app_arch.htm#sec_2_3_5 MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 08:40:49 UTC