[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Discussion of WSDL generation
After talking about it internally at TIBCO, and in a discussion with Anish, we've come to the conclusion that WSDL generation per-se is not really the problem that we're dealing with. Rather, we've failed to define a default data binding, and therefore defining rules for default WSDL generation seems difficult. Our suggested solution comes in two parts: define a default data binding, and then note that WSDL generation should be consistent with the data binding chosen. The relevant question, then, is what does the databinding look like? We came up with the following: Transport HTTP Style - single part message document Style - multi-part message rpc binding SOAP (should this be 1.1, 1.2, or both? - presumably depends on intent, but if none specified, probably 1.1) SOAP 1.1: SOAPAction = "" SOAP 1.2: Content-Type "action" parameter - absent encoding literal message part binding all message parts bound to the message body @namespace - needed for RPC literal -Eric.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]