Re: [comments] Note about WSDL2 Binding

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [comments] Note about WSDL2 Binding

Dan Connolly

On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 22:05 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:

> SPARQL Protocol for RDF
> W3C Working Draft 14 September 2005
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914/
>
>
> The explanation here is far to be satisfying. I would dedicate a  
> section to it and not relate on an email thread. If you really want  
> to justify your position, you have to explain the Pros and Cons. I  
> would still feel unconfortable with it but at least it would be  
> better than only a read message with a single paragraph listing too  
> fast making 3 statements.
>
> Don't forget we are writing specifications for a user who is an  
> implementer. It's not a forum for discussion.
>
>      [[[
>      (Note: The bindings shown here are not legal according
>      to the latest draft of WSDL 2.0 recommendation.

You might be interested in some recent progress, including
re-opening a WG issue:

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#wsdlAbstractProtocol

In particular, re limitations of {http output serialization},
it looks like there are updates to WSDL in progress that
better match SPARQL.
see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-desc-comments/2005Oct/thread#19

There are one or two related issues where we're still working out the
details with the WSD WG. We'll let you know how it turns out in due
course.

--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [comments] Note about WSDL2 Binding

Karl Dubost

Hi Dan,

Le 05-11-07 à 14:16, Dan Connolly a écrit :

>>      [[[
>>      (Note: The bindings shown here are not legal according
>>      to the latest draft of WSDL 2.0 recommendation.
>
> You might be interested in some recent progress, including
> re-opening a WG issue:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#wsdlAbstractProtocol
>
> In particular, re limitations of {http output serialization},
> it looks like there are updates to WSDL in progress that
> better match SPARQL.
> see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-desc-comments/2005Oct/ 
> thread#19
>
> There are one or two related issues where we're still working out the
> details with the WSD WG. We'll let you know how it turns out in due
> course.

Thanks for the update and the good work going on.
I'll stay tuned.

--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***