There are hundreds of self-contradictory, informal definitions
of "protocol binding" around the Internet. Many IETF RFCs
use this term just as we do in PWG, but none define it (that
I've found so far).
The following excerpt from WSDL/1.1 is illustrative of the
conventional computer science use of "protocol binding":
"Abstract: WSDL is an XML format for describing network
services as a set of endpoints operating on messages
containing either document-oriented or procedure-oriented
information. The operations and messages are described
abstractly, and then bound to a concrete network protocol
and message format to define an endpoint. Related concrete
endpoints are combined into abstract endpoints (services).
WSDL is extensible to allow description of endpoints and
their messages regardless of what message formats or
network protocols are used to communicate."
Thus, my proposed definition:
Protocol Binding: The combination of a network protocol
with a set of message formats, operations, and attributes
that constitutes a concrete data model for implementation
of an abstract information model and an associated set of
abstract operations and attributes.
The above definition fits the usage of this term in every
IETF RFC that I looked at this evening (several dozen).
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...