Re: [uddi-spec] WSDL TN: Claus's Issues

[John Colgrave <colgrave@hursley.ibm.com>]

Claus,

OK.  I will start a separate discussion for that too.

John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Von Riegen, Claus" <claus.von.riegen@sap.com>
To: "'John Colgrave'" <colgrave@hursley.ibm.com>; "uddi-spec"
<uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] WSDL TN: Claus's Issues


> John,
>
> Excellent idea.
> I agree to the lists, except that I'm missing an issue in the list of
issues that are still open:
> 5) The requirement to identify the wsdl:port from a given
uddi:bindingTemplate (i.e. why to register the port's target namespace and
local name in UDDI).
>
> Thanks,
>  Claus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Colgrave [mailto:colgrave@hursley.ibm.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 19. November 2002 14:24
> To: uddi-spec
> Subject: [uddi-spec] WSDL TN: Claus's Issues
>
>
> Claus,
>
> I would like to reset this discussion as the chain of notes is becoming
> unwieldy.  I would like to spell out the issues that I think are closed
and
> then list the issues that are still open.  I will then start a separate
> discussion of each of the open items.
>
> The issues that I think are closed are:
> 1) The use of wsdlDeployment in the V3 mapping/model.
>
> That list is shorter than I was expecting! :-)
>
> The issues that I think are still open are:
> 1) The cardinality of the mapping between wsdl:service and
> uddi:businessService.
> 2) The requirement to generate the wsdl:service.
> 3) The use of something like wsdlDeployment in the V2 mapping/model.
> 4) The tagging of the bindingTemplate rather than the binding tModel with
> details of the protocol and/or transport.
>
> Do you agree with these lists?
>
> Before going on to respond to each of these open issues separately, I
would
> like to give a little more of my general perspective.  A lot of the
> discussion has been around the requirements for web service
> interoperability, no doubt influenced by WS-I.  While I think that WS-I is
a
> very valid and valuable perspective, it is by no means the only one.  I
> would go further and say that, for WSDL, it is probably not the most
> important one at the moment.  A different perspective that is at least as
> important is that of programming languages and application development
> tools.  Most of the implementations of the current BP are in that context
> and I would say most of the usage of WSDL in general.
>
> John Colgrave
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>