Hi Simon,

I'm not sure that WSDL soap binding *should* attempt to describe 
"intermediaries" as such... if it represents a contract between two 
parties, I've assumed that these parties are to be viewed as 
endpoints of a transparent message path. WSDL is focused on 
describing services, which implies a provider at some ultimate 
destination given by the port. In this case, since the target actor of 
any headers meant for such an endpoint is the "default" actor, I'm 
not sure what  utility there would be in assigning an actor URI to 
header entries in the WSDL description for the service.

OTOH, if a message is passing from one SOAP node to another, in 
a sense a seperate "contract" indeed exists between the nodes. If 
like you say, the client binds to a service using the endpoint WSDL 
description,  what to do about describing the contract between the 
client and some intermediary? If multiple intermediaries are 
involved, some of which are not even known to the client, how to 
deal with that?

The problem comes into focus when implementing a general 
purpose routing intermediary... I agree that it's unclear how to 
WSDL in these scenarios, and might even venture the opinion that 
WSDL isn't the place to find the solution. Maybe all that WSDL 
should do is define the contract between service consumer and 
service provider, without any consideration for intermediaries. It's 
still quite possible to have the client bind to an intermediary directly 
using WSDL, in the "surrogate" scheme.

Anyway, just some thoughts. What do you think?

RC

>  There are a number of different ways this could go, I've been thinking
>  about how WSDL works with intermediaries, I've yet to come up with
>  something satisfactory, particular when the intermediaries are offing
>  general purpose services, that the client rather than server may of
>  decided to use.
>  
>  WSDL only appears to handle 'next hop' style cases, I'm very unclear
>  on how you would use WSDL in a multi-hop scenario, e.g. you want to
>  call the interop service, via a logging intermediary. If the client
>  code in this case is to be entirely driven by a WSDL definition, then
>  AFAICS the client programmer needs to manually compose a binding that
>  reflects his choice of intermediary services. This seems wrong to me,
>  there should be someway to compose the service definition based on the
>  parts, without the large overhead of having to define new binding. I
>  don't know if this is a problem with WSDL itself, or more of a problem
>  with the current generation of WSDL tools.
>  
>  Cheers
>  Simon
>  www.pocketsoap.com
>  
>  On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:22:02 -0600, in wsdl you wrote:
>  
>  >
>  >It seems that when we (generally) discuss actors, we are concerned with an
>  >actor-endpoint relationship and only the header-actor relationship as a
>  >derivative of the aforementioned.
>  >
>  >I think you need to define a uri-list of actors valid for an endpoint that
>  >apply to all headers at said endpoint.  I believe it is safe to assume that
>  >> 1 actor can exist per endpoint.
>  >
>  >It the above is correct, then the issue is where!  If you define a uri-list
>  >of actors on soap:header then any wsdl:port linked to the binding where the
>  >soap:header resides would have to inherent those actors, which effectively
>  >makes the actor(s) specific to the header and not the endpoint.
>  >
>  >So would...
>  >
>  ><wsdl:service...>
>  >	<wsdl:port...>
>  >		<soap:address location="some-uri">
>  >			<soap:actor actors="uri-list"/>
>  >		</soap:address>
>  >	</wsdl:port>
>  ></wsdl:service>
>  >
>  >be more efficient? You could then change the valid actors for an endpoint
>  >and have reuse available on the bindings.
>  >
>  >Thx,
>  >
>  >-Matt
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >> -----Original Message-----
>  >> From: Simon Fell [mailto:soap@[...].uk]
>  >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:40 PM
>  >> To: wsdl@[...].com
>  >> Subject: Re: [wsdl] nowhere to specify actor URI in WSDL ?
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Matt, why would it be a uri-list ?, isn't the actor attribute value a
>  >> single URI ?
>  >>
>  >> Cheers
>  >> Simon
>  >>
>  >> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:38:50 -0600, in wsdl you wrote:
>  >>
>  >> >Sanjiva and/or Erik,
>  >> >
>  >> >If (at some point/version in the future) an optional 'actor'
>  >> attribute was
>  >> >added to soap:header of type uri-list be sufficient?
>  >> >
>  >> >Thx,
>  >> >
>  >> >-Matt
>  >> >
>  >> >> -----Original Message-----
>  >> >> From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@[...].com]
>  >> >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:44 AM
>  >> >> To: wsdl@[...].com
>  >> >> Subject: Re: [wsdl] nowhere to specify actor URI in WSDL ?
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Huh.. I think we missed that :-). It seems that section 3.7 expects
>  >> >> the actor value to be indicated in the schema itself, but that
>  >> >> approach only works for literal stuff (see the section). Obviously
>  >> >> headers too can be arbitrary complex types and the literal use
>  >> >> restriction is not acceptable.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> It seems that this is a flaw in the SOAP binding .. Erik, do u agree?
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Sanjiva.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>  >> >> From: "Simon Fell" <soap@[...].uk>
>  >> >> To: <wsdl@[...].com>
>  >> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 9:48 AM
>  >> >> Subject: [wsdl] nowhere to specify actor URI in WSDL ?
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >> > Is there anyway to specify the actor URI for a header in
>  >> WSDL, i can't
>  >> >> > spot anything ?
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > Tx
>  >> >> > Simon
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >       Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>  >> >> >             ADVERTISEMENT
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  >> >> > wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> >
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  >> >> wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>  >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>  >> >>
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  >> >wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>  >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>  >> >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  >> wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  >wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com
>  >
>  > 
>  >
>  >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>  >
>  
>  
>  
>  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com
>  
>   
>  
>  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>  



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 
Break free. Great
American Smokeout
http://us.click.yahoo.com/3vN8tD/.pSDAA/ySSFAA/W6uqlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wsdl-unsubscribe@[...].com

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/