OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sca-assembly message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [sca-assembly] Issue 116: Interface compatibility refers to input/outputtypes which is ambiguous when using WSDL 1.1


Dave Booz
STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture
Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC
"Distributed objects first, then world hunger"
Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093

Inactive hide details for Mike Edwards ---03/02/2009 06:11:56 AM---Folks, Comments inlineMike Edwards ---03/02/2009 06:11:56 AM---Folks, Comments inline


Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>


Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>


OASIS Assembly <sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org>


03/02/2009 06:11 AM


[sca-assembly] Issue 116: Interface compatibility refers to input/output types which is ambiguous when using WSDL 1.1


Comments inline

Yours, Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com> wrote on 02/03/2009 10:24:04:

> [image removed]
> > Outline --
> > 1) Use the WSDL 1.1 interface as the canonical interface language and
> > require that "sameness" be determined after the interfaces are mapped to
> > WSDL 1.1.
>  >
> I don't think this is the right solution.  We don't require (and shouldn't
> require) that all SCA interfaces must be mappable to WSDL.  The requirement
> should be that the SCA interface types of the source and target interface
> define mappings that can be applied to the target interface to produce
> a representation of the target interface in the source interface language.

I disagree.  I think that for remotable interfaces, it is right and reasonable

to require that all interface types map to WSDL.  If this is not done, then you

have a difficult n x n mapping table to construct - and worse, I think it will

be hard to know whether any particular binding can be used for that remotable


The requirement for mapping to WSDL allows a much simpler approach both to

comparison of interfaces and also to the application of bindings.

For local interfaces, WSDL mapping should not be a requirement, but there,
the restrictions on mapping of interfaces will need to be spelled out.

>    Simon
> > -Anish
> > --

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]