RE: [uddi-spec] WSDL TN: Issue 5 - identification of port

["Von Riegen, Claus" <claus.von.riegen@sap.com>]

John,

Please find <CvR>my comments</CvR> below.

Claus

-----Original Message-----
From: John Colgrave [mailto:colgrave@hursley.ibm.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 20. November 2002 15:42
To: uddi-spec
Subject: [uddi-spec] WSDL TN: Issue 5 - identification of port



I think I have already covered at least part of this in one of the earlier
notes.  One reason for requiring the namespace name and local name in the
UDDI metadata is so that equivalent deployment WSDL can be generated by two
independent tools.

<CvR>O.k. That means we should better agree on the meaning of "equivalence" in this context. What I tried to say in my earlier response to the "WSDL TN: Issue 2 - generation of wsdl:service" was that equivalence of ports in two separate deployment WSDL documents is given when they are generated from the same bindingTemplate - by using the referenced binding tModel and the contained accessPoint. Naming of the port element and its cointaining service element doesn't count for equivalence. If the port name in the first generated deployment WSDL is built by using the bindingTemplate's bindingKey and the port name in the second generated deployment WSDL is built by concatenating the businessEntity:name, the businessService:name and the name of the binding tModel, it is still the same Web service if the port's network address is the same in the two deployment WSDL documents.</CvR>

The local name is also required in the wsdlDeployment case where a service
has more than one port and only the base URL of the deployment WSDL file is
in UDDI, that is, we are not using XPointer.

<CvR>We should either require referenced deployment WSDL documents to contain only one port or use the XPointer mechanism as we used in the WSDL BP V1 to distinguish between different bindings. Or we should revisit our wsdlDeployment scenario and discuss what it means if the WSDL contains more than one port.</CvR>

I am not sure that you cannot define more than one targetNamespace in a
single WSDL file so the namespace may also be required to uniquely identify
the correct service/port in the wsdlDeployment case also.

We could choose not to categorise the bindingTemplate with the port
namespace in the V3 model, but at the cost of requiring the containing
service to be retrieved to find it.

John


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>