Sebastien,
This sounds like a good approach to me.
Yours, Mike.
Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Hi,
I think it's about time that we implement the SCA <binding.sca>
"default" binding, about 10 months after the publication of the initial
SCA spec v0.9 :)
As far as I can remember all discussions on the subject, the idea has
always been to reuse the Web Service binding for this, with some
simplifying assumptions and good defaults (WS-I basic profile,
doc-lit-wrapped, no need to specify a WSDL binding or even a WSDL
interface).
Reusing the Web Service binding extension code is probably the simplest
at this point but will create a dependency between this new
extensions/sca binding and the existing extensions/ws. I think it's OK
for now as our Web Service binding extension is still very light weight
and we can assume that people looking at Tuscany for an SOA runtime will
want the Web Service extension in the distribution. So if there's no
objection I'm planning to just do that: reuse the Web Service binding
extension and implement the SCA default binding extension as a thin
layer on top of it.
In the longer term the Web Service extension will probably grow (to
support more WS profiles, SOAP versions, WS policies etc.) so we'll have
to find a better solution and maybe carve out of the Web Service
extension a small subset that can be shared between the two extensions
or just used by the SCA default binding extension.
Dos that plan sound OK? Any thoughts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
