Yes but do you want to make a collection-level WSDL file with all services and methods embedded or make generic enumerator methods? What is the use-case for all this. I would like that we support all interfaces on all levels, not just WSDL.
2012/11/1 Mykhailo Stadnyk <[email protected]> > I really can't understand your arguments. > > I propose to have 2 levels of WSDL descriptions. Currently you have only > one level. I DO NOT propose to change this. I just propose TO ADD on a > collection level another one WSDL which describes WHOLE collection. And it > means that the user still possible to do everything you've mentioned with > every single service, but for whose, who need - there whould be a > possibility to request whole collection description with one HTTP request. > > Best regards, > Mike > > > 2012/10/31 Jakob Simon-Gaarde <[email protected]> > >> I might add, that delivering such collection level service with standard >> methods for listing services would also make it easier for the end-user to >> enumerate the collections capabilities. >> >> >> 2012/10/31 Jakob Simon-Gaarde <[email protected]> >> >>> Oh wait - now I see what you meen. I thought you just ment there was an >>> error in the wsdl generation. >>> >>> I really don't think it's a good idea to make wsdl files or >>> jsonwsp/description files (which btw do not support this as we speak) that >>> describe the whole collection. I think Ladon should keep the descriptions >>> per service and try to uphold a hierarchical approach to the >>> Collection/Service access. >>> >>> I would definately prefer that we make a standard collection level >>> webservice that can list services, and maybe even service methods with >>> arguments and types. >>> >>> /Jakob >>> >>> >>> 2012/10/31 Jakob Simon-Gaarde <[email protected]> >>> >>>> Please - go ahead and fix it, no problem. >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/10/31 Mykhailo Stadnyk <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> Jacob, I reviewed WSDL specification and see that you are not true. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl#_document-s >>>>> >>>>> service element defined as: >>>>> >>>>> <wsdl:service name="nmtoken">* ** >>>>> >>>>> Asterisk means the following from the same specification: >>>>> >>>>> "Characters are appended to elements and attributes as follows: "?" (0 >>>>> or 1), *"*" (0 or more)*, "+" (1 or more)." >>>>> >>>>> So, it means that standard directly points to the fact that you can >>>>> describe as many services as you want in one WSDL >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2012/10/19 Jakob Simon-Gaarde <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Mike. >>>>>> >>>>>> Simplest and least complex solution is almost always the best >>>>>> solution, that's almost a rule in my experience :-) >>>>>> WSDL Does not support multiple services in one description file, so >>>>>> when you speak about imploding several services into one WSDL file I can >>>>>> almost guess that it involves a "MetaService" that picks up all methods >>>>>> defined in all services of a collection and wrap them into one meta >>>>>> service. I see plenty of problems in that approach right away that tells >>>>>> me >>>>>> this is not a simple nor uncomplex solution. For instance, which service >>>>>> class has precedence if the same service method is defined in two >>>>>> different >>>>>> service classes. Already here we would have to take non-intuitive >>>>>> choices. >>>>>> >>>>>> I still like the idea that it is possible to enumerate all service >>>>>> classes and methods of a service collection programmatically, but I think >>>>>> it should be through the approach I talked about, because it does not >>>>>> break >>>>>> standards and it does not have to take undefined choices. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also this approach will let us keep the Ladon's URL style but now in >>>>>> levels: >>>>>> >>>>>> Service-level descriptions: >>>>>> GET http://my.domain.org/<ServiceName>/<protocol>/description >>>>>> Service-level method calls: >>>>>> POST http://my.domain.org/<ServiceName>/<protocol> >>>>>> >>>>>> Collection-level description (only one and always the same with >>>>>> methods like "collectionInfo()", "listServices()" ) >>>>>> GET http://my.domain.org/<protocol>/description >>>>>> Service-level method calls: >>>>>> POST http://my.domain.org/<protocol> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> / Jakob >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2012/10/19 Mykhailo Stadnyk <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Need to check that in spec but we tried to implode several services >>>>>>> into one WSDL and it does work! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2012/10/19 Jakob Simon-Gaarde <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I like the idea that the collection can describe itself. But as far >>>>>>>> as I know there is no WSDL specification for service collections that >>>>>>>> allow >>>>>>>> this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But there is nothing to stop us from exposing a single method >>>>>>>> service at collection level which can list all services in a >>>>>>>> collection. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> / Jakob >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2012/10/19 Mykhailo Stadnyk <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Jacob. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Another one idea I think IS REALLY required in ladon is to have >>>>>>>>> WSDL/JSONWSP/etc.. descriptions for service catalogs. I mean if there >>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>> published subset of service objects it's good to have only one URL >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> describes all the services available. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Than just in client: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> import suds >>>>>>>>> service = suds.client.Client(' >>>>>>>>> http://localhost/soap/description').service >>>>>>>>> service['Test'].echo() >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Because currently if I want to work with several service objects I >>>>>>>>> need to do 1 more HTTP request to parse description for each service >>>>>>>>> I use >>>>>>>>> and it's not very good. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I guess it's not hard to implement. Currently I'm working on REST >>>>>>>>> implementation proposal and after I guess I can work on this feature. >>>>>>>>> What is your opinion? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team >>>>>>>>> Post to : [email protected] >>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team >>>>>>>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards >>>>>>>> Jakob Simon-Gaarde >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team >>>>>>>> Post to : [email protected] >>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team >>>>>>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards >>>>>> Jakob Simon-Gaarde >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards >>>> Jakob Simon-Gaarde >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards >>> Jakob Simon-Gaarde >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards >> Jakob Simon-Gaarde >> >> -- >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team >> Post to : [email protected] >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> > -- Med venlig hilsen / Best regards Jakob Simon-Gaarde
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ladon-dev-team More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
