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

Title: [wsrp-webservices] WSDL call today

"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