Partial interface implementation

Hi everyone,<br />
<br />
I am currently facing some challenges related to defining WSDL interfaces and
their implementations in WID 6.1.<br />
On the interface level, I would like to group operations based on either
technical or business-related aspects. <br />
<br />
However, when I assign an interface to an SCA component, this component is
forced to implement ALL operations. Often times one SCA implementation type does
suit all of the operations in an interface. <br />
<br />
For instance, I have an interface X with two operations A and B which belong
together from a business point of view. Operation A is bound to be implemented
as BPEL process whereas operation B should be implemented as Java component. How
can I achieve that without separating the operations into two WSDL
interfaces?<br />
<br />
I clearly dislike the fact that the SCA model places implementation-specific
restrictions upon interface design. Or maybe I misunderstand some basic concepts
and the way SCA forces me to build my interfaces is more in line with the SOA
concepts?<br />
<br />
Any hints on this are highly appreciated. Best regards,<br />

I understand what you are trying to do and it makes sense from a logical 
POV.. the problem is that a WSDL file is a contract that says "I agree to 
implement all the portTypes specified in this file". Cherry-picking isn't 
allowed and SCA/WSDL isn't smart enough to understand you ARE implementing 
the contract but via two components.

Your best answer is to split them up so that each component only provides an 
implementation for the portType.. You COULD use the same wsdl (with the 
multiops) and not implement the 'opposite' porttype.. Throw a NotImplemented 
exception or something..

-- 
Dan Zrobok -Technical Architect - Perficient
WID/WPS/WESB Blog: http://blog.danzrobok.com


<dwforums@us.ibm.com> wrote in message 
news:1016668780.1206968760752.JavaMail.wassrvr@ltsgwas010.sby.ibm.com...
> Hi everyone,<br />
> <br />
> I am currently facing some challenges related to defining WSDL interfaces 
> and their implementations in WID 6.1.<br />
> On the interface level, I would like to group operations based on either 
> technical or business-related aspects. <br />
> <br />
> However, when I assign an interface to an SCA component, this component is

> forced to implement ALL operations. Often times one SCA implementation 
> type does suit all of the operations in an interface. <br />
> <br />
> For instance, I have an interface X with two operations A and B which 
> belong together from a business point of view. Operation A is bound to be 
> implemented as BPEL process whereas operation B should be implemented as 
> Java component. How can I achieve that without separating the operations 
> into two WSDL interfaces?<br />
> <br />
> I clearly dislike the fact that the SCA model places 
> implementation-specific restrictions upon interface design. Or maybe I 
> misunderstand some basic concepts and the way SCA forces me to build my 
> interfaces is more in line with the SOA concepts?<br />
> <br />
> Any hints on this are highly appreciated. Best regards,<br />
> Matthias