[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address tModel
sounds reasonable to me.
.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Andre Kramer |
| | <andre.kramer@eu.|
| | citrix.com> |
| | |
| | 01/19/2004 04:35 |
| | PM |
|---------+---------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org |
| cc: |
| Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address tModel |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I would then just add some text to state:
"Additional binding information, when appropriately typed through the use
of tModles, is allowed for both WSRP producer and portlet businessServices.
This includes the use of tModels to flag access points as containing the
URL of a WSDL document, in order to ease consumption by various Web Service
tool chains and to ease conformance to currently defined best practice and
future standards"!
regards,
Andre
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jacob [mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com]
Sent: 19 January 2004 15:25
To: Andre Kramer
Cc: wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address tModel
I think the B.9.4 is somehow weird written.
I assume the access point value ist the service.wsdl URL, not a literal
named "WSDL".
See this cite from Appendix A:
"In all cases where a WSDL Implementation Document is used, the URLType
attribute of the
accessPoint corresponding to each port MUST be "other", and the value of
the accessPoint
MUST be the URL of the WSDL Implementation Document."
This is exactly what we have now.
The only thing the tech note does in addition is:
"The bindingTemplate MUST contain a tModelInstanceInfo element with a
tModelKey of the
WSDL Address tModel."
So basicly this tModel does the same thing as the V3 "wsdlDeployment".
Yes, I know the addition of wsdlDeployment to V3, and was targeting for
that once we add V3 (perhaps even in this tech note?).
So the question is,
Do we want to mention/support/adapt parts of UDDI tech note 2? From what is
left now I see only this appendix A for us.
But however I would rather drop it. People wanting to support v2 tech note
can still add this reference without affecting our model (because we have
cite one implemented in our model).
I would drop for the following reason:
Implementors of products against UDDI v2 would then need to add this
reference.
When migrating to UDDI v3 they would publish redundant information.
Or do we want publishers to distinguish whether v2 or v3 is being used?
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Andre Kramer |
| | <andre.kramer@eu.|
| | citrix.com> |
| | |
| | 01/19/2004 03:23 |
| | PM |
|---------+---------------------------->
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address
tModel
|
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
The way I interpret this WSLD Address tModel is that the access point must
then have the string literal "WSDL" as the value for the access point.
Presumably the service file.wsdl URL is taken from the overview document
URL (see example of use B.9.4)???
If this is the correct interpretation (or we agree that it's ambiguous)
then I would suggest we don't add this and wait for UDDI v3:
http://uddi.org/pubs/uddi-v3.0.1-20031014.htm appendix B.1.2 text
-----------
B.1.2 Using the "wsdlDeployment" value
Instead of directly providing the network address in the accessPoint, it is
occasionally useful or necessary to provide this information through
indirect means. One common scenario for such a behavior is when the
accessPoint is embedded within a WSDL file. In such a scenario, the UDDI
accessPoint contains the address of the WSDL file, and the client then must
retrieve the WSDL file and extract the end point address from the WSDL file
itself.
In this case, decorating the UDDI accessPoint with a useType
="wsdlDeployment" is appropriate. A sample of such behavior is as follows:
<bindingTemplate bindingKey="uddi:example.org:catalog">
<description xml:lang="en">
Browse catalog Web service
</description>
<accessPoint useType="wsdlDeployment">
http://www.example.org/CatalogWebService/catalog.wsdl
</accessPoint>
<categoryBag>
<keyedReference keyName="uddi-org:types:wsdl"
keyValue="wsdlDeployment"
tModelKey="uddi:uddi.org:categorization:types"/>
</categoryBag>
</bindingTemplate>
In the example above, a client would be able to parse the result of the
bindingTemplate and determine the end point of the Web service within the
WSDL file discovered in the accessPoint element. Note that the
bindingTemplate has also been categorized with the "wsdlDeployment" value
from the uddi.org:categorization:types scheme so that it can be discovered
through a find_binding API call.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jacob [mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com]
Sent: 19 January 2004 12:18
To: Richard Jacob
Cc: Andre Kramer; wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address tModel
However, we may decide to not to support the v2 technote right from the
start.
But on the other hand it specifies exactly what we want - indirection and
the wsdl being the authoritative source.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Richard |
| | Jacob/Germany/IBM|
| | @IBMDE |
| | |
| | 01/19/2004 01:11 |
| | PM |
|---------+---------------------------->
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: Andre Kramer <andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com>
|
| cc: wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org
|
| Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address
tModel
|
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
exactly this would mean a 3rd reference here, sorry I miscounted the
tModels :-)
The Bindings tModel inherits wsdl-ness (I like that :-) ) but this only
expresses that the technical fingerprint is described in wsdl.
However usually the access point is the real endpoint.
While in our case the access point is the wsdl holding the endpoints.
This indirection is expressed by the WSDL Address tModel in the UDDI
technote v2.
Could you also verify this
(
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/tn/uddi-spec-tc-tn-wsdl-v200-20031104.pdf
)
?
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Andre Kramer |
| | <andre.kramer@eu.|
| | citrix.com> |
| | |
| | 01/19/2004 11:31 |
| | AM |
|---------+---------------------------->
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address
tModel
|
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I had forgotten to ask about this. I noted that the wsrp_v1_Bindings tModel
does "inherit wsdl-ness" by use of the keyedReference "uddi-og:types" /
"wsdlSpec" (section 5.2.3).
But do we not already have 2 tModels: WSRP_Producer and WSRP_v1_Bindings,
so you are adding a 3rd WSDL Address tModel?
regards,
Andre
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Jacob [mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com]
Sent: 19 January 2004 09:51
To: wsrp-pfb@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI#3] use of UDDI's wsdl address tModel
The WSDL in UDDI V2 technote contains a section discussing WSDL as the
authoritative source for port access points in Appendix A.
It mandates to reference a tModel indicating that the access point is the
WSDL URL and that port endpoints must be retrieved from the WSDL.
Here is an excerpt of Appendix A:
"If a WSDL Implementation Document is being used then the bindingTemplate
MUST contain
sufficient information to identify the port address in the WSDL
Implementation Document.
The mapping described here MUST be used instead of the mapping defined in
section 2.4.5.
In all cases where a WSDL Implementation Document is used, the URLType
attribute of the
accessPoint corresponding to each port MUST be "other", and the value of
the accessPoint
MUST be the URL of the WSDL Implementation Document.
The bindingTemplate MUST contain a tModelInstanceInfo element with a
tModelKey of the
WSDL Address tModel. This tModelInstanceInfo element, in combination with
the protocol
and transport information from the binding tModel, provides the necessary
information to
locate and interpret the endpoint address."
This would mean that our Producer's bindingTemplate (currently we have only
one) would reference that tModel in addition.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:richard.jacob@de.ibm.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-pfb/members/leave_workgroup.php
.
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrp-pfb/members/leave_workgroup.php
.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]