Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
Message-ID: <003901c16ea8$700ebe20$9fa17cca@watson.ibm.com>
From: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
To: <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
References: <47FD4196C273D411950300508BCF197801656D06@S0001EXC0006>
 <032501c16e47$328cb4a0$48a17cca@watson.ibm.com>
 <001b01c16e4a$a9ff9860$b3185480@genesis.adtech.internet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: What do we do with operation types:  notification,
 solicit-response?
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:10:03 +0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

What are the semantics of solicit-response and notification
operations? If I'm a service S with solicit-response operation
o1 of port type pt1, from whom do I solicit a response?

Using instant messaging as a transport is an orthogonal issue
I believe. It should be possible to implement SOAP RPC using
an IM transport such as Jabber (and I believe such code exists).

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Benjamin Szekely" <bs48@cornell.edu>
To: <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: What do we do with operation types: notification,
solicit-response?


> I've been working on how to implement solicit-response and notification
> services using instant messaging as the transport.  The way I do it is I
> create a custom Java Provider which passes IM identities and pressence
> (awareness) information to the service object.  I have some demos of this
> that I did for soap 2.2.  I have two different IM transports for Axis
which
> I could easily write providers for.
>
>  Ben
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
> To: <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 9:33 PM
> Subject: Re: What do we do with operation types: notification,
> solicit-response?
>
>
> > +1
> >
> > The semantics of solicit-response and output-only are not quite
> > fully defined. I'd rather have the semantics fixed properly
> > rather than do any implementation of it.
> >
> > Sanjiva.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>
> > To: <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 12:03 AM
> > Subject: RE: What do we do with operation types: notification,
> > solicit-response?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I would say generating a warning (and adding an option to suppress
> > warnings)
> > > and ignoring the operation would be a reasonable thing to do.
> > >
> > > This would allow someone to use a WSDL file which had one-way
operations
> > in
> > > it in addition to the request-response operations that they wanted to
> use.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tom Jordahl
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Russell Butek [mailto:butek@us.ibm.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 12:59 PM
> > > To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > Subject: What do we do with operation types: notification,
> > > solicit-response?
> > >
> > >
> > > WSDL defines 4 operation types:
> > >    request-response:  in message, out message, fault message optional
> > >    one-way: in message
> > >    solicit-response:  out message, in message, fault message optional
> > >    notification:  out message
> > >
> > > JAX-RPC says "JAX-RPC 1.0 specification supports the mapping of
> operations
> > > with request-response and one-way transmission primitives.  The
standard
> > > Java mapping of operations defined with other transmission primitives
> > > (notification, solicit-response) is considered out of scope in the
> JAX-RPC
> > > 1.0 specification."
> > >
> > > Earlier we had decided to throw an exception if Wsdl2java encounters a
> > > notification or solicit-response operation.  But now that I'm thinking
> > > about implementing this check, I have a question.  Do we complain and
> > > ignore the operation, generating everything else?  Or do we fail
> outright
> > > and not generate anything?
> > >
> > > Russell Butek
> > > butek@us.ibm.com
> >