Hi, After hitting send I immediately realised my error, WADL isn't a UDDI equivalent (it is to REST as WSDL is to SOAP), so please ignore my mistake and just please consider LDAP as a potetial candidate for a registry, if you think its really viable.
Regards Wayne On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Wayne Keenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Would you keep WADL*1 in mind when considering alternatives please? > Also, when I was 'looking around' a few months back I bumped into a > WIP book (http://www.manning.com/davis/) > which uses an LDAP implementation*2 as the basis of the registry, so > could you keep that in the back of you mind too please? > > *1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Application_Description_Language > *2 http://directory.apache.org/ > > I watched a google tech talk from a Mr J. Bloch on API design, and his > suggested if you can support 3 different providers in a Service > Provider Interface than you can be pretty sure you have a high chance > of being able to support any variation that may come around :) > > Regards > Wayne > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Asankha C. Perera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Paul >> >> This would be good.. also we could support other Registries than UDDI, and >> this could be similar in implementation to the WSDL endpoint >> >> asankha >> >> Paul Fremantle wrote: >>> >>> Ruwan >>> >>> I believe what Eddie is proposing is to pull the endpoint definition >>> from UDDI instead of from WSDL. >>> >>> So instead of >>> >>> <endpoint> >>> <wsdl...../> >>> </endpoint> >>> >>> You would have >>> <endpoint> >>> <uddi ....> >>> </endpoint> >>> >>> This would look up the endpoint URL from UDDI. In fact there probably >>> would be two options - one is simply to look up the URL in UDDI (using >>> a UDDI endpoint definition) and the second is to pull a full WSDL from >>> UDDI (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-wsdl/) >>> >>> Its been a while since I really studied UDDI, but I guess the main >>> thing we should do is to define what the <uddi/> tag needs as input, >>> and then once we have that clearly defined, we can code it and test >>> against some implementations. >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Ruwan Linton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hi Eddie, >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi there, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> i want to integrate jUDDI and Synapse too. >>>>> can i join? >>>>> any proposed scope? >>>>> >>>> >>>> For the moment there is no built-in integration with jUDDi, if you need >>>> this >>>> feature, you may go ahead and file a JIRA for this. >>>> >>>> http://issues.apache.org/ >>>> >>>> to me, it will be very useful if it can easily connect to jUDDI as one of >>>> >>>>> >>>>> the endpoint types >>>>> >>>> >>>> What do you mean by endpoint type here, AFAIK jUDDI is a registry right? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Ruwan >>>> >>>> Eddie Lau >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> View this message in context: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/-Synapse-1.1.1--problems-with-XML-request-tp17336164p18176973.html >>>>> Sent from the Synapse - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ruwan Linton >>>> http://wso2.org - "Oxygenating the Web Services Platform" >>>> http://ruwansblog.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Asankha C. Perera >> >> WSO2 - http://wso2.org >> http://esbmagic.blogspot.com >> >> >
