Subject: RE: P-services interface in Strawman OPES Charter

From: "Abbie Barbir" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:28:02 -0400

Alex,
yes, can not just assume that things are implied or give the impression that
we will do that.
To be very frank, there will be a huge debate about WSDL and how, when or if
it will be used. This is the nature of the beast with service description.

Abbie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Rousskov [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 2:52 AM
> To: Markus Hofmann
> Cc: OPES Group
> Subject: Re: P-services interface in Strawman OPES Charter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Markus Hofmann wrote:
> 
> > What about the following:
> >
> >    In addition, the WG will define a rules language to control
> >    selection and invocation of services by an OPES processor. This
> >    includes a mechanism allowing an OPES processor to 
> perform a runtime
> >    check of service parameters, leveraging existing interface
> >    description standards like WSDL, if possible, or OPES-specific
> >    description otherwise.
> 
> Sounds good to me. I assume there will be a sentence 
> somewhere about documenting interfaces for P/HTTP and P/SMTP 
> modules. Or is that implied?
> 
> Injecting "investigate" before "a mechanism allowing" may 
> make Abbie happier. Or we can replace "includes" with "may 
> include". Is that what you are after, Abbie?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex.
> 
>