Re: [wsrp-webservice] [wsrp-webservices] WSDL call today

[Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>]

Is the question about mixing ports (say, some from v1 and some from v2)?

 > across a producer that decided to publish distinct services per WSRP
 > port -- which I expect most consumers not deal with correctly.

Any example?

Subbu

Michael Freedman wrote:
> "The service definition contains both v1 & v2 ports. Personally, I would 
> prefer a separate service for v1 and v2 ports."
> 
> 
> One issue I have been meaning to post to the overall group is the 
> question on whether the specification needs to say anything about how a 
> consumer interacts with a service that contains mixed versions [ports]. 
> I know we assume that consumers will choose to either only use the v1 or 
> the v2 ports but should we have language that directs them [or strongly 
> suggests they] to do this?  I ask in part because we have recently come 
> across a producer that decided to publish distinct services per WSRP 
> port -- which I expect most consumers not deal with correctly.
>     -Mike-
> 
> 
> Andre Kramer wrote:
> 
>> The SC held a call to discuss the XSD schema and WSDL for draft 11.
>>
>> Attendees: Subbu, Clinton, Mike & Andre
>>
>> Andre walked through the .xsd & .wsdl files pointing out changes and 
>> potential issues:
>>
>> The service definition contains both v1 & v2 ports. Personally, I 
>> would prefer a separate service for v1 and v2 ports.
>>
>> Type extension is now used.
>>
>> String type restriction is not used (types declared but elements still 
>> use string). This really is a pity but we are unlikely to get all 
>> tools to work otherwise.
>>
>> Choice (union-like content model) is unused and may be unacceptable in 
>> the lifetime scope of v2.
>>
>> Use of namespaces is simplified (mirroring what we had before in v1) 
>> but people should check that they can handle (types from) both v2 & v1 
>> namespace if they need to.
>>
>> Testing (no issues reported):
>>
>> Andre and others have tried VS 2003.
>>
>> Clinton will try Axis 1.2 and VS 2005 (if he can find a copy).
>>
>> Subbu will test with internal tooling.
>>
>> [IBM will have some testing.]
>>
>> We request that Atul could test against the current JAX-RPC reference 
>> implementation. Thanks.
>>
>> Other:
>>
>> We are unlikely to test MTOM/XOP any time soon.
>>
>> We should have one more call before the committee draft. Fine checking 
>> of the WSDL / spec match still needs to be done. Andre found some 
>> small inconsistencies but other (faults in particular) are unlikely to 
>> have all been picked up.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Andre
>>
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To 
> unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that 
> generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in 
> OASIS at: 
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php