[Bug 6694] New: Which specifications have implicit operations?

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6694

           Summary: Which specifications have implicit operations?
           Product: WS-Resource Access
           Version: FPWD
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: All
        AssignedTo: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
        ReportedBy: dug@us.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org


Its not clear which of the WSRA specs have implicit vs explicit operations.
In other words, which operations would appear in the WSDL for a service?

IMO MEX is clearly a infrastructure spec - I don't think we expect
any client to actually write those operations or have their wsdl->code
tooling generate stubs for those.

The others are not as clear to me.  I suspect that some people might
think they're infrastructural and some might consider them to be
more like an application.

I believe the impact of this will be:
- implicit ops will _not_ appear in service's wsdl
- we'll need to figure out how to express implicit op's QoS/policy
- we'll need to figure out how to advertise which optional implicit ops are
supported (probably thru policy)

- explicit ops will appear in a service's wsdl along with user-defined ops
- no need for policy to describe which ones are optional - wsdl does this
- we'll need to figure out how to express the op's QoS/policy - probably just
attaching policy

No clear proposal right now, but it seems to me that a question to ask
is whether or not we expect end-users to actually generate and fill-in
the code for any stubs generated from explicit ops that appear in WSDL?
With this in mind I'm having a hard time seeing how any of these specs
should be explicit.  hmmm, maybe that was a proposal  :-)

note: I'm not talking about things like events - I think those will need
to generate stubs - but the Subscribe() doesn't seem like something an
end-user should be forced to code up.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

Received on Friday, 13 March 2009 00:34:50 UTC