[Twisted-web] Twisted and WSDL

David E. Konerding dekonerding at lbl.gov
Tue Feb 14 12:12:28 MST 2006

Amit Upadhyay wrote:
> On 2/15/06, *David E. Konerding* <dekonerding at lbl.gov 
> <mailto:dekonerding at lbl.gov>> wrote:
>     If you check out the serialize-dom-scheme branch, you get a really
>     nice
>     WSDL code generator for Python (much, much better than SOAPpy
>     or normal ZSI).  Then, go get pyGridWare.  It adds a Twisted service
>     container that can house ZSI-based web services. 
> WSDL code generation completely defies the purpose of having WSDL in 
> the first place, refer: 
> http://webservices.xml.com/pub/a/ws/2003/07/22/wsdlfirst.html 
> <http://webservices.xml.com/pub/a/ws/2003/07/22/wsdlfirst.html>

You misunderstood me.  Perhaps if I call it a "python code generator 
from WSDL descriptions",
you would have understood more clearly.

Even though I fall into the camp of "write your wsdl, generate language 
specific bindings, implement service and client
using specific langauges", I am not vehemently opposed to features like 
those in WSRF.NET.  In that toolkit,
users use C#-specific language features to mark up their C#-written 
classes.  Those markups are used
to guide the generation of WSDL.  From what we can tell (as implementers 
of Python-based grid services that
have been tested to interoperate with C# WSRF grid services) there are 
no problems with this approach.   In
fact, the process is so natural we have considered using decorators in 
Python to do the same thing.  This sort of
feature really only exists to provide developers who prefer to work in a 
native language rather than specifying the messages
they want to exchange.

I read the article you cited.  It is only an opinion piece, and provides 
no coherent, logical argument for their
viewpoint.  Further, the article is obviously dated due to its focus on 
RPC encoding, which is not a viable approach
for writing web services these days. 


More information about the Twisted-web mailing list