WIMS> Normative Ref to WSDL/2.0 would block WIMS as PWG CS

WIMS> Normative Ref to WSDL/2.0 would block WIMS as PWG CS

WIMS> Normative Ref to WSDL/2.0 would block WIMS as PWG CS

wamwagner at comcast.net wamwagner at comcast.net
Mon Oct 31 14:24:24 EST 2005

Option D would appear most best. But without minutes of meeting, it is unclear what the comment was, what the implications were, and what the WG beleives is necessary to address it.

Bill Wagner

-------------- Original message -------------- 

After having the opportunity to speak with Ira regarding this, we think there may also be an "option D" which is to describe normative Soap v1.2 but supply NO WSDL example at this time.. rather indicate that WSDL 2.0 is in progress and it is our intent to supply normative WSDL following adoption of WSDL 2.0 as a W3C candidate recommendation. 
Harry Lewis 
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
IBM Printing Systems 

"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald at sharplabs.com> 
Sent by: owner-wims at pwg.org 
10/31/2005 10:53 AM To"'wims at pwg.org'" <wims at pwg.org> 
SubjectWIMS> Normative Ref to WSDL/2.0 would block WIMS as PWG CS


Per the WG last comment on WIMS Protocol spec last week (for examples
of WSDL definitions and actual SOAP messages), I've been working on WSDL
for the WIMS Protocol -  following the excellent examples in the recent 
WS-Polling submission from IBM to W3C.

Good News - conveniently, I recently released the WIMS Message schema,
which is most of the work - the WSDL itself is very small by comparison.

Bad news - we all repeatedly agreed to make the non-standards-track
bindings (using WSDL/1.1 and SOAP/1.1) _optional_ for compatibility and
make standards-track bindings (using WSDL/2.0 and SOAP/1.2) _mandatory_ 
to implement.

But, the W3C site now says (at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/):

"Below are the targeted publication dates for the WSDL 2.0 drafts:

 Second Last Call
   June 2005
 Candidate Recommendation
   October 2005
 Proposed Recommendation
   Early 2006"

PSI/1.0 fudged on this and standardized a SOAP/1.1 binding described in
WSDL/1.1 (calling them 'defacto industry standards' - which is true, but 
they're still not interoperable).

So the WIMS/1.0 Protocol spec will have to:

(a) Use the above SOAP/1.1 fudge for normative bindings;
(b) Wait for the approval of WSDL/2.0 (now a working draft) by W3C;
(c) Use SOAP/1.2 for normative bindings
   and INFORMATIVE references to the WSDL/1.1 W3C Note 
   and INFORMATIVE examples of WSDL/1.1 for the SOAP/1.1 binding.

My apologies for not realizing this problem earlier.

- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI  49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald at sharplabs.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pwg.org/archives/wims/attachments/20051031/3ed9fc37/attachment.html

More information about the Wims mailing list