Talk:Windows Communication Foundation

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft: .NET / Windows Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject .NET (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Microsoft Windows (assessed as Low-importance).

Misses Microsoft End of Life

WCF is only client side in .NET Core. Microsoft has announced in multiple blog entries that .NET Core 2.x and later plus the upcoming .net 5.0 framework will not provide any sort of WCF server side support. Therefore, any services written using WCF will not have a forward migration path. Many large corporations have extensive use of WCF for server side APIs.

Non-copyvio article started

I have started work on a non-copyvio article at Windows_Communication_Foundation/Temp. -- Jugalator 11:54, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Links

The Windows Communication Foundation page could use more links. There are numerous related Wikipedia topics as well as a growing number of Web pages with information about WCF organization, deployment, use and performance.

Craig Bolon 16:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please help us do that. --so U m y a S ch 05:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.NET 3.0 Stack

IMO this image of the Vista 3.0 Stack is very nice. I don't know how but I'd like to contact the author and ask for an SVG Version. Then I would put INSIDE the SVG Image The links to wards the concerning Topics like: Windows XP , .NET 2.0 Don't you think too that would be nice? The Image Linking seems much more reasonable and accessible than text Linking.

wbr wikiwriter

"binding"

Please wikify the term "binding" to the appropriate article: Binding (computer science), or Name binding, or Language binding, or...? TIA.

--Jerome Potts 20:09, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term "binding" in this case refers to the second option, which is "Binding (or connecting) to a server in client–server computing," which has no article. The only options in this case are a) linking to the Client-server model page (could be very confusing for the user), b) Creating a page solely on "binding to a server" (not going to happen--concept is way to narrow), or c) leaving it up to the user to be smart enough to realize that the next sentence in the article clarifies what form of "binding" this is talking about. I vote for option C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.67.180.20 (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WS-I

"While Microsoft is a board member of WS-I it is not clear how many WS-I profiles they are committing to support fully." My take on WS-I is that it was created by the IBM-Microsoft alliance to promote their preferred standards for web services. Other standards bodies like W3C and OASIS have worked on proposed standards, not all of which suited IBM and Microsoft. If I'm right, the sentence from the article is somewhat misleading. There is every chance that any WS-I profile will be supported by Microsoft because they would have had considerable influence on its creation. Anyone know of a good source to cite on this? Paul Foxworthy (talk) 02:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Code samples

We need code samples! 85.91.157.104 (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC) :)[reply]

The first sentence is somewhat weird.

Wouldn't it be better instead of- "used to build applications that inter-communicate", "used for building communication points between applications"?

Serialization?

Another Wikipedia page that uses "serialization" without referencing what it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.98.237 (talk) 17:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Serialization is the process by which an object is converted to a sequence of bytes so the object can be stored or transferred. Deserialization is the process by which these bytes are resequenced back into an object. To provide an analogy, serialization is to objects what the transporters are to people in Star Trek. When Scotty 'beams' Kirk from the Enterprise to a planet's surface, Kirk is 'serialized' into a sequence of data which is then sent to the planet where this sequence of data is 'deserialized' back into a person. Anyway, I'll add a link to our serialization article to this article. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article completely misses the point

I just picked up Michele Leroux Bustamante's book from O'Reiley Press and I'll try to update the article as I go through it. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need to put more detail

Hi I am Mohsin. I am working as software professional in Noida. I think we need to elobrate more on WCF. Sections including WCF contracts, Hosting, bindings along with code samples can be added in this page. This will make Windows Communication Foundation more elobrative —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohsin Wiki 09 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

In the current state there are many formatting problems with the article: numbering af sections and formatting of the sample source code. For example, near:

1.5.2.3. Advanced hosting features The ICommunicationObject interface supported

I wouldn't mind doing the required changes, but I am not sure exactly how.

For example, should there be the following 4 level deep structure in the article?

    1.5.

      1.5.1.

        1.5.1.1.

        1.5.1.2.

      1.5.2.

        1.5.2.1.

        1.5.2.2.

        1.5.2.3.

        1.5.2.4.

      1.5.3.

--Mortense (talk) 13:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think those sections need to be rewritten. They are more appropriate in a technical manual than in an encyclopedia. I prefer the previous version of the article. 118.68.249.15 (talk) 03:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is a formatting issues with this article. I think we can add an introduction section and provide a description from the average user perspective. I beieve that would be a good starting point cleaning up the article. We can try to write this from a more business user's view point. For an example we could say (in a more academic way) that WCF is a Framework that is associated with .net and would be ideal for enterprises which have already invested in MS technologies to create service oriented applications. What is your take on that (Ramya20 (talk) 15:55, 25 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Interoperability with other XML technologies

WCF does not only support SOAP messages, it can also be configured to support standard XML data that is not wrapped in SOAP, or can even be used to supports formats such RSS, or JavaScript Object Notation (JASON) which makes WCF flexible for current requirements and future changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramya20 (talk • contribs) 19:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WS != SOA

Article begins by saying that WCF is a framework "for building connected, service-oriented applications." This seems to confuse "web services" with "service-oriented applications". I would describe WCF as doing the former. The two sources given don't mention SOA or Service-Oriented Architecture at all. Irrbloss (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History / chronology

No history/chronology at all in the article. I would think that for an encyclopedia, that should be here. - Jmabel | Talk 07:33, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Windows Communication Foundation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101008202155/http://msdn.microsoft.com:80/en-us/netframework/aa663324.aspx to http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa663324.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]