[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [uddi-dev] Multiple access points II
Spot on! I agree with you. I would make two services -- especially since they each have their own wsdl file. Anne > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Sterk [mailto:paul.sterk@sun.com] > Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 1:52 PM > To: Von Riegen, Claus > Cc: xws-regrep-dev-all@sun.com; uddi-dev@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [uddi-dev] Multiple access points II > > > > Claus, > > Thanks for your response. To conclude then, a UDDI > businessService can be composed of 1 or more service endpoint > URLs. So, when doing programmatic searches against the Registry, > you will first have to find the businessService and then find the > bindingTemplate that points to the particular service > endpoint through a tModel. > > The next conclusion is that it is a design decision whether or > not each businessService implements just one WSDL spec and has > just one service end-point. It can definately have more than one > bindingTemplate for indicating other tech specs and > classifications. I just think this is more intuitive for > businessService to have one service end-point URL. > > To use the example below, I think it is more intuitive for the > user to see two businessService entries, one for BOM Explode and > one for BOM Implode since each has a different service contract > (WSDL) and service end-point URL. > > businessService Binding Template > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > BOM Implode Service end-point -> http://hostname1/BOMI > tModel -> bomi.wsdl > > BOM Explode Service end-point -> http://hostname2/BOME > tModel -> bome.wsdl > > rather than this: > > businessService Binding Template > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > BOM BOM Implode -> http://hostname1/BOMI > tModel -> bomi.wsdl > BOM Explode -> http://hostname2/BOME > tModel -> bome.wsdl > > But again this is a design decision. > > Paul > > > "Von Riegen, Claus" wrote: > > > Hi Paul, > > > > The answer is the same as the one for your previous question: > there is no technical limitation on the type of bindingTemplates > your want to group within one businessService. Though, it migth a > good modeling approach to separate bindingTemplates that > implement different Web service types. > > > > Finding a specific bindingTemplate is carried out by using the > find_binding API and putting the wanted tModel in the > find_binding's tModelBag. Thus, you can programmatically find > only bindingTemplates that implemented bomExplode or bomImplode, > respectively - independently of the modeling approach > > used. > > > > I don't have any experience with JAXR. Whether this works in > JAXR or not depends on how the mapping to the UDDI APIs is defined. > > > > Claus von Riegen, SAP > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Sterk [mailto:paul.sterk@sun.com] > > Sent: Freitag, 7. März 2003 02:30 > > To: uddi-dev@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: [uddi-dev] Multiple access points II > > > > Hi, > > > > Second question regarding multiple access points per service. A > proposal has come up to allow someone to register a service and > have multiple accessPoints for the service. The issue here is > that each accessPoint points to a different service. > > > > Let me give an example: > > > > The service is registered as Bill of Materials. It has two > accessPoints: > > > > Bill of Materials Explode > > http://hostname/bomExplode > > > > Bill of Materials Implode > > http//hostname/bomImplode > > > > These are two different services with different associated WSDL docs. > > > > I am personally uncomfortable with this model because I believe > that each businessService should be mapped to one service > implementation. I feel that BOMExplode and BOMImplode are two > different services and should be registered separately. > > > > However, I would like here what your experience and opinions > are in this area. > > > > If this model is acceptable, how do you find a specific > accessPoint programmtically (JAXR) in UDDI v2.0? Do you use the > tModelInstanceDetails object? > > > > Any feedback in this regard would be very helpful. > > > > Thanks, > > Paul > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]