ant elder wrote:
On 8/22/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip/>
I really like the suggestion that WSDL be automatically discovered
> anywhere
> within the application directory structure.
I pretty much have the same concerns as mentioned by Raymond on this.
I'm confused by this thread, you're concerns are the same as Raymonds,
Raymond says Sebastien points out the problems, but AFAICT Sebastien
likes
the auto discovery approach and I think this is how the C++ guys are
going
to implemented it. What alternative approaches do you like - must use
wsdlLocation on every interface.wsdl and binding.ws? Only auto
discover in a
specific folder such as META-INF/wsdl? Re-instate import.wsdl? Something
else ? I'd just like to get something going, especially while Yang is
sounding so keen to help out.
...ant
Just to confirm what Ant is saying, I think that the application
developer should be free to place WSDLs and XSDs wherever it makes sense
for him under the structure where he installs his other development
artifacts. With my application developer hat on, I don't like to have to
write an extra config file or extra XML elements in SCDL to list the
WSDLs and or XSDs that I just put there, my view is that in 2006 a
modern runtime should be able to find my WSDL files for me without any
hand holding. Whether this is the adopted scheme or not I think the SCA
specification should define the packaging structure and how references
to WSDL from SCDL get resolved (just using qnames or locations as well?
per composite? per packaging / installable unit? or per system...).
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
