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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sca-bindings message

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

Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] Issue 25: Does binding.ws imply SOAP


I agree with the general direction advocated here:

1) <binding.ws/> implies a WSDL-related binding

2) <binding.ws/> SHOULD imply a SOAP binding

3) <binding.ws/> WITHOUT an explicitly supplied WSDL MUST support SOAP & HTTP

4) An implementation of binding.ws MAY implement a limited subset of WSDL bindings - and the list of supported
bindings MAY exclude SOAP and MAY exclude HTTP

5) SOAP support, when present, MUST include EITHER SOAP 1.1 OR soap 1.2, both preferably...

I also agree with the need to have a RESTful binding.  
Who would like to work on a spec for such a binding? (I'm looking for volunteers)

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

Bryan Aupperle <aupperle@us.ibm.com>

30/05/2008 16:27

[sca-bindings] Issue 25: Does binding.ws imply SOAP

I was persuaded by Simon N.'s comment about keeping binding.ws as flexible as possible, but I also recognize the interoperability concern.  Following from that, I believe that we could reasonably take the following position:

- binding.ws requires an interface described by WSDL (either explicitly or implicitly) with no restriction on WSDL binding from an SCA standpoint.  Any given implementation MAY limit the WSDL bindings it supports

- A new binding (binding.http?) is needed for RESTful interfaces that are not described with WSDL - as Anish pointed out use of WSDL is objectionable to many REST supporters.

This does waken the concept that binding.ws is guaranteed to be interoperable since we no longer know that a SOAP binding is provided, but I believe that if we have the alternative binding that a significant percentage of the binding.ws implementations would support a SOAP binding.  If we wanted to be clear about this we could state that implementations of binding.ws SHOULD support a SOAP binding.

Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect

Research Triangle Park,  NC
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com

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]