Re: [sca-bindings] For consideration: HTTP binding specification

Raymond,

Thanks for the response.  To some
extent, that's the reason I contributed this document, to get peoples opinions
on a general-purpose HTTP binding vs. something more REST-specific.

The intention of the binding in the
document was to standardise the basic HTTP connectivity aspects, and then
allow specific HTTP interaction patterns to be represented by additional
wireFormat and operationSelector elements.  We should be able to define
operationSelector.REST and wireFormat.REST, which would be used by this
binding to provide that pattern.

The "poor-man's Web Service support
over HTTP using RPC style" is embodied, I believe, only by the defined
default operationSelector and wireFormat, and I have no objection to changing
those to something that we think is more likely to be used in the majority
of cases.  However something has to be defined as the default, and
what's in the document is consistent with what was done for JMS, for better
or worse.

I'm going to include this on the agenda
for the 30th October to get the TC's reactions and opinions on whether
this could be included in the overall SCA 1.1 standardisation.

Regards, Simon

Simon Holdsworth

STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair

MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK

Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898

Internet - 

Raymond Feng/Burlingame/IBM@IBMUS

23/10/2008 17:04

To

Simon Holdsworth <>,


cc

Subject

Re: [sca-bindings] For consideration:
HTTP binding specificationLink

Hi,

Just want to share my personal perception here:

I briefly read the draft. My impression is that it tries
to come up some sort of poor-man's Web Service support over HTTP using
RPC style (tunneling the invocations over HTTP). What are the advantages
will it provide over SOAP/HTTP or JSONRPC/HTTP? I'm wondering if it would
be better to focus on the REST style by mapping HTTP methods into a set
of business operations that deal with resources.

Thanks,

Raymond

From:
Simon Holdsworth <>

To:


Date:
10/22/2008 03:16 AM

Subject:
[sca-bindings] For consideration: HTTP
binding specification

Folks, 

On behalf of IBM, I hereby contribute the following documents to the OASIS
SCA Bindings TC for its consideration: 

I appreciate its somewhat late in the day but this has been mentioned in
principle in various discussions so I thought it would be worth submitting
this and getting the reaction of the TC with regards to including this
in the overall SCA 1.1 standard. 

I have written this as a general-purpose HTTP binding with no Web 2.0 specifics
in it, the assumption being that those can be addressed via extensions
to the interface, operationSelector and wireFormat elements, although for
portability it may well be worth us considering whether we want to standardise
support for URL template syntax, interface.wadl, wireFormat.xml, wireFormat.json,
operationSelector.rest, etc. 

Regards, Simon 

Simon Holdsworth

STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair

MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK

Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898

Internet - 

Unless stated otherwise above:

IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. 

Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

Unless stated otherwise above:

IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. 

Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU

sca-binding-http-1.1-spec-wd01.doc