[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: RDDL and WSDL

• To: "Xml-Dev@Lists. Xml. Org (E-mail)" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: RDDL and WSDL
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:50:34 -0500
• In-reply-to: <FB4F95390166B14C90E4DD950D69D6E21A8042@E...>

cwilper@c... (Chris Wilper) writes:
>The concept is an API.  If it has a URI, great.  If it can be
>resolved, excellent.  If I get a choice as to what representation of
>the resource I want, even better. 
>
>I'm not sure RDDL is the right thing, as currently scoped
>as a "namespace document" -- but the idea of a resolved URI 
>providing an index of descriptive representations of
>a concept/resource ... is appealing.

Interesting, though I'll admit that I cringe any time people map XML
vocabularies directly to APIs.

Is answering Simon Fell's original question about roles [1] enough to
deal with this, or is something more powerful needed?  

I guess I can see RDDL pointing to "here's how to process this stuff"
via WSDL, but worry that WSDL itself specifies something larger than
RDDL, as most Web Services I've seen involve interactions between
multiple (and frequently more than 2) namespaces.

[1] - http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200103/msg00171.html

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org

• References:
  • RE: RDDL and WSDL
    • From: "Chris Wilper" <cwilper@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Is Resource/Representation a fruitful abstraction? (was Re: many-to-many)
• Next by Date: catch (was Re: RDDL and WSDL)
• Previous by thread: RE: RDDL and WSDL
• Next by thread: RE: RDDL and WSDL
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread