[uddi-spec] Updated WSDL TN for review

[Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>]

I've identified (in comments) a few issues that still need to be resolved:

1- We have not yet identified an HTTP Transport tModel that can be used in
both UDDI V2 and V3. (The V3 tModel has been changed to represent HTTP/GET
only.)

2- There's some concern regarding the mapping of wsdl:service to
business:service (see Claus's earlier comments). I suggest in the comments
that we maintain this direct mapping and then provide guidelines to use
service projections to associate the wsdl-based service with the more
logical uddi:businessService.

3- As far as I can tell, I see not requirements for why we need to capture
the WSDL entity type for service and port.

4- In the V2 service/port mapping, we duplicate the WSDL URL in every
bindingTemplate for a businessService. This information should be specified
in the businessService.

5- In the V3 service/port mapping, we do not capture the WSDL URL location
at all.

6- In the V3 service/port mapping, we duplicate the WSDL namespace in every
bindingTemplate. It isn't needed because it is specified in the
businessService.

6- We should define a process by which vendors/user can register new
standard tModels for protocols and transports (and other uses), and we
should cite this process in this document.

7- The WSDL example taken from the WSDL 1.1 spec has an error (the binding
name specified in the port is not the same as the binding local name). I've
corrected the error in this document, but should we make note of the fix?
Perhaps in a footnote?


Anne Thomas Manes
617-497-1748 (land)
617-642-3144 (mobile)

Attachment: wsdl-tn-2.00-draft-20021114-atm4.doc
Description: MS-Word document