attachment

After having the opportunity to speak with Ira regarding this, we think there may also be an "option D" which is to describe normative Soap v1.2 but supply NO WSDL example at this time.. rather indicate that WSDL 2.0 is in progress and it is our intent to supply normative WSDL following adoption of WSDL 2.0 as a W3C candidate recommendation. ---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis IBM STSM Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group http://www.pwg.org IBM Printing Systems http://www.ibm.com/printers 303-924-5337 ---------------------------------------------- <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td width=40%>"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com> Sent by: owner-wims@pwg.org 10/31/2005 10:53 AM <td width=59%> <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td> <div align=right>To</div> <td>"'wims@pwg.org'" <wims@pwg.org> <tr valign=top> <td> <div align=right>cc</div> <td> <tr valign=top> <td> <div align=right>Subject</div> <td>WIMS> Normative Ref to WSDL/2.0 would block WIMS as PWG CS</table> <table> <tr valign=top> <td> <td></table> </table> <tt>Hi, Per the WG last comment on WIMS Protocol spec last week (for examples of WSDL definitions and actual SOAP messages), I've been working on WSDL for the WIMS Protocol -  following the excellent examples in the recent WS-Polling submission from IBM to W3C. Good News - conveniently, I recently released the WIMS Message schema, which is most of the work - the WSDL itself is very small by comparison. Bad news - we all repeatedly agreed to make the non-standards-track bindings (using WSDL/1.1 and SOAP/1.1) _optional_ for compatibility and make standards-track bindings (using WSDL/2.0 and SOAP/1.2) _mandatory_ to implement. But, the W3C site now says (at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/): "Below are the targeted publication dates for the WSDL 2.0 drafts:  Second Last Call    June 2005  Candidate Recommendation    October 2005  Proposed Recommendation    Early 2006" PSI/1.0 fudged on this and standardized a SOAP/1.1 binding described in WSDL/1.1 (calling them 'defacto industry standards' - which is true, but they're still not interoperable). So the WIMS/1.0 Protocol spec will have to: (a) Use the above SOAP/1.1 fudge for normative bindings;    <or> (b) Wait for the approval of WSDL/2.0 (now a working draft) by W3C;    <or> (c) Use SOAP/1.2 for normative bindings    and INFORMATIVE references to the WSDL/1.1 W3C Note    and INFORMATIVE examples of WSDL/1.1 for the SOAP/1.1 binding. My apologies for not realizing this problem earlier. Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Blue Roof Music / High North Inc PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI  49839 phone: +1-906-494-2434 email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com </tt>