MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
wsia message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [wsrp][wsia] Draft spec v0.85
Here is the draft reflecting the decisions from the recent F2F:
(See attached file: WSIA - WSRP Interface Specification v0.85.doc)
Here are the current versions of the WSDl files ... the Axis tools will not
process this unless upgraded to the latest set of bug fixes. The WSDL group
continues to work on making this something all the tools can process and
produce/receive messages from each other.
(See attached file: WSRP_v1_Interfaces.wsdl)(See attached file:
WSRP_v1_Binding.wsdl)(See attached file: WSRP_Service.wsdl)
In pulling this together I have worked through clarifying a number of areas
people questioned, including sections 8.3 & 8.4 discussing interoperability
of roles. It currently discusses how Producers and Consumers making
different choices about supporting this option. The one area this has left
me with big concerns is when both choose to support roles. I don't see any
clearly definable semantics whereby Consumer maps its roles to the Producer
published roles. To keep it simple, I would like to consider the scenario
where:
The Consumer only supports the spec defined roles of Administrator, User
and Guest
The Producer declares the roles Admin, Buyer and Seller
A reasonable administrator at the Consumer will probably map the
Administrator role to the Producer's Admin role, but clearly the
granularity of the Producer's roles does not match the granularity of the
Consumer's roles. There is no reasonable mapping available to be made.
Reflecting on this further, the whole schema of role mapping only really
works when there is a huge overlap in the roles supported at the Producer
and the Consumer. To me this is more and more smelling like something that
belongs as an extension rather than an inherent part of the spec.
The other area I am questioning whether it brings enough value to be
included in v1.0 is the registration portType. So much of the function is
in the extensions array that I'm starting to wonder if the entire portType
should move out of the spec.
Attachment:
WSIA - WSRP Interface Specification v0.85.doc
Description: MS-Word document
Attachment:
WSRP_v1_Interfaces.wsdl
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
WSRP_v1_Binding.wsdl
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
WSRP_Service.wsdl
Description: Binary data
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC