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

[Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>]

Folks,

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

To	sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
cc
Subject	[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