Web services are described using WADL(Web Application Description Language) and WSDL(Web service description language). WADL and WSDL vary in that WADL is used to define resources available on a web service, whilst WSDL is used to describe the activities and messages used for communication between the client and web service. WADL is concerned with resources, whereas WSDL is concerned with messages. So let's debate WADL Vs WSDL to understand more about it.
What is WADL?
WADL stands for web application description language. It is an XML document that describes which application resources a client can access. WADL is thought to be the REST equivalent of SOAP.
Related article: Advantages and disadvantages of WADL
What is WSDL?
WSDL stands for Web service Description language. IBM and Microsoft collaborated to build WSDL, which was recognized by the W3C on June 26, 2007. It is a language for describing web service functionality that is based on XML. Its architecture is made up of three primary parts: types, binding, and operations. A typical WSDL, in general, specifies the process of implementing and communicating with XML-based services.
WADL Vs WSDL | Difference between WADL and WSDL:
- WADL stands for web application description language. WSDL stands for Web service description language.
- WSDL is XML that helps in describing restful web services. While XML helps in describing SOAP-based web series.
- A client loads a WADL file and accesses the complete functionality of the web services. While WSDL is a client load the WSDL file and gets into the method web service which calls the arguments and returns data types.
- WADL is equivalent to SOAP web services description language. WSDL is a machine-readable description with the current version of 2.0.
- WADL is lightweight, easy to understand and write as compared to WSDL. While WSDL is difficult to understand and write as compared to WADL.
- WADL does not evolve binding to SMTP servers. It has a simple design. While WSDL consists of binding to SMTP services. It consists of a complex design.
- WADL requires some simple URI template mechanism. Also, limited scope compared to WSDL. Whereas, here the user needs to define the XML input message to use the URI template mechanism. It has a greater range than WADL.
- W3C does not recommend the WADL interface. WADL is very simple. But W3C does recommend a WSDL interface. Whereas it is more flexible than WADL.
Explore more information:
Thank you for reading this article. Still, if you have any questions or queries in your mind on the WADL Vs WSDL then please ask us in the comment section below.