RE: Describing which blobs are to be optimized.

> > In any case, if you guys have already gone over this before, I won't
> > insist (but I remain skeptical about the soundness of this assumption).
>
> Call for discussion of whether WSDL ought to be solely from the point of
> view of the service, anyone?  Is Gudge listening?

(I am)

No, no, no.  :-)

WSDL describes things from the service point of view.


--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 12:41 PM
To: Ugo Corda
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Describing which blobs are to be optimized.


On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:12:30 -0700
Ugo Corda <[email protected]> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amelia A Lewis [mailto:[email protected]] 
> > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 7:32 AM
> > To: Ugo Corda
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Describing which blobs are to be optimized.
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 15:57:20 -0700
> > Ugo Corda <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I also have my doubts about the rationale for focusing on 
> > the endpoint 
> > > declaration of the provider agent. For instance, what does that 
> > > endpoint mean in the case of an Out-only pattern? Wouldn't 
> > it be more 
> > > useful to have the endpoint declaration of the "requester" agent 
> > > instead?
> > 
> > Only if you're locked into thinking about HTTP and 
> > client/server models.
> > 
> > In a pub/sub world, an out-only pattern (or any out-initial 
> > pattern) is a nice fit, and we expect to see these widely 
> > used.  This is because, in pub/sub, the service is talking, 
> > not listening; publishing, not serving. 
> > The other nodes interacting with the service are not 
> > requesters/clients, but listeners/subscribers.
> >
> 
> That's exactly my point. In that kind of scenario, it should more
> important to focus on the endpoint of the listener/subscriber than on
> the endpoint of the service itself.

No, no, no!  Absolutely not!  The *publisher* defines what it publishes. 
It publishes en masse.  It is not controlled by the subscriber.  It just
spews.  It's up to the subscriber to separate wheat from chaff.

> > > I don't see why it should be that way and why we should assume that 
> > > the provider agent's behavior is better known than the requester 
> > > agent's behavior.
> > 
> > Because the WSDL is always from the point of view of the 
> > service.  
> 
> This sounds more like an article of faith than a rational explanation. 

It's neither.  It's a topic that has been hotly debated, and adopted as a
principle, which then leads to certain forms of information being included
in the document, and other forms excluded.

> In any case, if you guys have already gone over this before, I won't
> insist (but I remain skeptical about the soundness of this assumption).

*shrug*

Call for discussion of whether WSDL ought to be solely from the point of
view of the service, anyone?  Is Gudge listening?

Amy!
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Senior Architect
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
[email protected]