Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact soap-user-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list soap-user@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 35858 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2000 13:22:03 -0000 Received: from marble.bpa.gov (170.160.4.254) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 26 Jul 2000 13:22:03 -0000 Received: from mortar.bpa.gov (mortar.bpa.gov [53.135.11.239]) by marble.bpa.gov (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA07870 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exch03.bpa.gov (exch03 [53.180.254.193]) by mortar.bpa.gov (8.8.5/8.6.10) with ESMTP id GAA07628 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by exch03.wins.bpa.gov with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:22:03 -0700 Message-ID: From: "Kochheiser, Todd W - TOS" To: "'soap-user@xml.apache.org'" Subject: RE: Defining a SOAP Application Schema Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:22:02 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Thank you very much for filling in what was a very large missing piece for me and apparently the SOAP standard in general. It's all very clear now ;-) Are you aware of the current status of a standard for describing interfaces and if it will be included in the next version of SOAP? Without it (and Vendors to support and use it), the wholly grail of SOAP being agnostic to OS, language, and vendor seems rather far off. Regards, Todd Kochheiser -----Original Message----- From: James Snell [mailto:jmsnell@intesolv.com] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 4:43 PM To: 'soap-user@xml.apache.org' Subject: RE: Defining a SOAP Application Schema Todd, There are currently four separate proposals for "SOAP Interface description" grammars that use XML Schema to describe the base XML architecture as well as additional grammar to describe interface and entrypoint semantics. There is some progress being made to merge these into one, possibly two, different proposals. In the meantime, the two primary choices (currently available in production environment) are Microsoft's SDL (supported only by the SOAP Toolkit) and IBM's NASSL (supported only by IBM's NASSL Toolkit for the SOAP4J Codebase). In short: there aren't any really STANDARDS for how to descibe SOAP interfaces via XML-Schema. The options you can pick from are: 1. IBM NASSL 2. MS SDL 3. MS SCL (SDL's successor that is still being defined) 4. SIDL (www.soap-wrc.com/sidl.txt) 5. Raw XML-Schemas - James -----Original Message----- From: Kochheiser, Todd W - TOS [mailto:twkochheiser@bpa.gov] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 4:28 PM To: 'soap-user@xml.apache.org' Subject: Defining a SOAP Application Schema Greetings, I've read more about SOAP than I probably should have and I have yet to find a good example/standard for how to describe, via XML-Schema, a large set of methods, their parameters, and return types. While there are LOTS of examples of SOAP instances that show a request/reply, finding a good Schema documenting a "real" application seems to be a bit more of a challenge. First, before I too ahead of myself, I'm new to this list and will probably show my ignorance rather quickly. What I'm trying to do is convert an existing inter-company (b-to-b if you will) application that uses a proprietary CSV format sent via an HTTP POST. In the current application we define "templates" and their request/reply CSV formats (column headers and such). SOAP looks IDEAL to finally replace this nightmare and I can visualize very clearly how it would work. But, before I attempt to document the new SOAP methods to replace the CSV templates, I'd like to make sure the XML-Schema I produce will truly capture the SOAP Header and Body child elements and provide adequate documentation to the developers. And, the structures will generally be complex rather than simply input/output types. Without any industry direction, I'll need to add a lot of verbiage to describe how the elements in my schema relate to one another (response element for a request, etc.) and when certain headers are to be used. I know that MS uses SDL, but I'm fairly certain that isn't a universal standard and is poorly documented. Also, this application will be implemented by many different companies using many different operating systems and languages. So, I don't have the benefit of complete control over the environment. Regards and thank you, Todd Kochheiser Bonneville Power Administration