[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Groups - BPEL4WS 1.1 Issues Log May 23.doc uploaded
I was trying to make 2 points: 1) BPEL's interoperability is a Web service interoperability problem. 2) Portability on the other side is a true BPEL problem. SQL had some of the same portability promisses. It delivered huge value to the enterprise while not delivering 100% code portability. Edwin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 6:25 AM > To: edwink@collaxa.com; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org > > > - We should have interoperability out of the box through Web > > service interfaces > > That could be more complicated depending on which WSDL > binding we are considering. So far I have not seen any > constraint in BPEL for WSDL to be limited to the standard W3C > bindings (SOAP, or HTTP, or MIME). > > Even considering WSDL SOAP binding only, then it is an issue > of whether we are considering SOAP over HTTP, or some other > popular but proprietary bindings (e.g. to a JMS provider). > > Or are you thinking of a different type of interoperability? > > Ugo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]