1.0rc1 WSDL issues

[Paul Harrison]

There are some other issues that the WSDL still contains that I am  
not sure of the current consensus.


1. Callbacks for the data import/export operations.
2. DataObjectReference type contains the idea of a name (expressed as  
a string) and a container that the Object lives in - I am not sure  
that this distinction is still needed now that we have some consensus  
on the vos: URL scheme, as it has built in semantics for expressing a  
container.
3. DIME transfers - the 0.21 spec mentions a usage of DIME that  
implies that there should be a specific operation that the files  
could be attached to, and by implication this operation should be in  
the interface definition. This was not how I would have envisaged  
DIME working if we allow it as a transport, as it loses the principal  
advantage of attachments anyway, i.e. that the HTTP SOAP call with  
all the necessary data is atomic and synchronous. Would it not be  
better to say that if DIME is specified as a transport then the data  
be attached to the pullDataFromVoSpace or pullDataToVoSpace calls  
themselves?
4. ChangeOwner operation - is this fundamental enough to deserve  
inclusion?
5. GetPropertyKeys - not in the spec and an idea that I have had  
basically because I am still a little worried about interoperability  
problems with the completely untyped nature of the property-key pairs  
- particularly as they are expected to carry some fundamental  
metadata about the data objects in the current implementation. This  
call would return the complete list of key names that have been used  
in the VOSpace, which would then allow clients to attempt to be  
consistent in the use of key names - it is not much but at least it  
does provide a mechanism to voluntarily avoid complete anarchy.
6. Transports/Formats operations - this information could/should in  
principal be in the Registry entry for VOSpace (we need a registry  
extension schema also! and quickly - ideally before the v1.0 rollout  
this summer).

Paul.