Re: [wsbpel] implicite links of the runtime engine (was: Implicit <sequence> macro)

[David RR Webber - XML ebusiness <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Assaf,

Agreed.  I like the idea of this 'bridge' based on WSDL concepts.
That way you can specify a binding that will work with WSDL, 
but someone could actually use something else - that just supports
that binding detail - and so we're not totally dependent on
WSDL.

Lesson learned: the W3C has a way of throwing you curved balls,
so being able to work despite those is mighty useful!

DW.
========================================================
Message text written by Assaf Arkin
>That's why I said "using WSDL" and not "by WSDL". The WSDL group can't 
come up with all the possible mapping that we'll ever need. If you use 
proprietary bindings then of course you are not interoperable or 
portable. What WSDL gives you is a framework in which you can 
incorporate bindings that can be portable and interoperable if enough 
products support them. That's not something you would have if you used, 
say IDL.
<