On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Simon Laws<[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:49 AM, ant elder<[email protected]> wrote: >> Looking at the latest specs to confirm the question in TUSCANY-3211 >> about what a WS endpoint URL should be I'm now wondering if we're >> doing this right in 2.x. Right now a service using a default >> <binding.ws> will use expose the service with an endpoint URL using >> componentName/serviceName, but the specs say: >> >> The WS binding spec (1.1 CD03) says: >> >> 255 Note that if no absolute URI is indicated by any of these >> elements, implementations can use the structural URI for the binding >> as a portion of the URI for the eventual deployed endpoint. >> >> and the Assembly spec (1.1 CD03) describes the structural URI as: >> >> 2237 For components directly deployed into the Domain, the structural >> URI is simply the name of the component. >> >> and >> >> 2249 The structural URI can also be extended to refer to specific >> parts of a component, such as a service or a reference, by appending >> an appropriate fragment identifier to the component's structural URI, >> as follows: Service: #service(servicename) >> >> So shouldn't the default WS binding endpoint URL use just the >> componentName or componentName#service(serviceName)? >> >> ...ant >> > > and also Assembly spec (1.1 CD03) says > > 2787 SCA Bindings specifications can choose to use the structural URI > defined in the section "Structural URI of Components" above to derive > a binding specific URI according to some Binding related scheme. The > relevant binding specification describes this. > > Important word here for me is "derive". As you point out the WS spec > says that the binding can use the structure URI as a potion of the > deployed endpoint URI. All seems fairly loose. > > At the moment I think the algorithm in play does something like... > > http://host:port/path to component/servicename/bindingname > > Where binding name is only included in the cases where more than one > binding is present. > > Regards > > Simon >
It does seem loose, and also along with that 2787 in the assembly spec the WS binding spec says: 247 This specification does not mandate any particular way to determine the URI for a web services binding on an SCA service. so it seems we can do what ever we like. I guess I was asking if we're happy with how it works right now so we can try and make it work as consistently and as simply as possible across bindings. Using just the componentName (as 1.x does) seems simplest for simple cases, but it doesn't seem great to have an existing endpoint change if the component is updated to have an additional service or binding added. ...ant
