RE: [wsrp-pfb] [UDDI #4] WSRP_v1_Bindings tModel equals WSRP_Produc er tModel?

["Richard Jacob" <richard.jacob@de.ibm.com>]

Andre Kramer <andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com> wrote on 01/21/2004 05:15:34 PM:

> For me the WSRP_v1_Bindings says two things:
> 1. This service is for version 1.0 of the WSRP specification
> (interface signature and semantics)
> 2. This service is described by a wsdl document. The details of how
> to select the actual protocol binding is delegated to the referenced
> wsdl document.
Correct, this is what we have now.

> Also requiring the more abstract WSRP_Producer implies that we will
> have other specification versions and other ways to select protocol
> bindings in future (new best practice).
right, but this would be the same without the Producer tModel.
However I see (and that's why it already in the tech note) that by having
th WSRP_Producer tModel we have a version and description method agnostic
means to find Producers (search for WSRP_Producer tModels). Otherwise we
would require an explicit "OR" when searching (once we have multiple
versions).

> I would note that a (WSRP v1
> SOAP based) consumer can search directly for WSRP_v1_Bindings so the
> extra tModel is mainly a publishing overhead for now.
true
> Would it help to make 2 more explicit, e.g. WSRP_Producer +
> WSRP_v1_WSDL_Binding?
could you elaborate please, don't see the reasonsing here.
Isn't that what we have now?

> Another options would be to separate 1 and 2:
> WSRP_v1_Producer + WSRP_WSDL_Binding or just WSRP_WSDL_Binding (but
> consumer would have to parse our naming convention to discover version
info).
could you also elaborate more detailed here, please.
What would the WSRP_WSDL_BINDING tModel describe, would it point to a wsdl?
Also would the WSRP_v1_Producer tModel point to the Interfaces WSDL?

cheers
Richard