You're assumptions are correct. You configure everything via an XML config file. You can have the same WCF service using queues, SOAP, etc or even use a binary transport instead of a text-based transport depending on how it gets called.


>And here's what I'm curious about (haven't had time to play with any of this in the past year or two, but plan to look into it now):
>
>I've always constructed my asmx web services to accept and return simple datatypes, such that they are compatible with different platforms ... IOW, they can be consumed by non-.NET applications. Consequently, when I returned a DataSet, I did *not* return a serialized DataSet class, but returned the data itself, serialized into XML ... return MyDataSet.GetXml(); ... which is simply a string of simple XML that can be read and utilized by any app, not just a .NET app.
>
>Given the above scenario, and assuming that I want the same sort of interopability with other platforms, I'm assuming that the main thing that WCF gives me is the flexibility of using my service in different ways (Remoting and queuing) ... even if I want to keep my simply datatypes. Is this a fair assumption to make?
>
>~~Bonnie