OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

business-transaction message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: Re: [business-transaction] SOAP Bindings Stuff


From the start I think we've all pretty much agreed that BTP should be
protocol agnostic. If I want to define a carrier-pidgeon mapping then it'll
work just as well as, say, SOAP, and won't require changes to the message
set. However, when I say "protocol agnostic" I mean that if there is a
binding of BTP to X (where X could be SOAP RPC, SOAP Messages,
Carrier-Pidgeon) then all participants within a specific BTP will use that
protocol binding.

I get the impression (rightly or wrongly) that some people might like
participants within a single business transaction to use any-and-all
mappings if they are present and in any combination. So, for example, some
participants may be communicating via messages, while others use RPC, and
still others use pidgeon at the same time. It is this requirement that seems
to hindge the RPC versus messages debate (true method calls versus doWork
options). If people want a SOAP RPC binding and a SOAP message binding then
we shouldn't be looking at making the two interoperate. We can always add
bridges later.

Mark.

----------------------------------------------
Dr. Mark Little
Transactions Architect, HP Arjuna Labs
Email: mark@arjuna.com | mark_little@hp.com
Phone: +44 191 2064538
Fax  : +44 191 2064203





[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC