W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > September 2004

RE: Editorial: Issue 177 Implementation

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:28:57 -0700
Message-ID: <5B10E50E14A4594EB1B5566B69AD9407068E683F@maileast>
To: 'Jonathan Marsh' <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>, public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org

Thank you for considering my request.

Asir

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 2:04 PM
To: Asir Vedamuthu; public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
Subject: RE: Editorial: Issue 177 Implementation


The Working Group resolved this issue (LC2 [1]) by accepting your
proposal [2] (below).  We will assume you accept this resolution if we
don't receive an explicit acknowledgement by 1 October.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC2
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Aug/0006.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Asir Vedamuthu
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 8:23 AM
> To: 'www-ws-desc@w3.org'
> Subject: Editorial: Issue 177 Implementation
> 
> 
> ref: issue 177 [1]
> 
> On July 8th, we adopted [2] Jonathan's proposal [3]. I have one
editorial
> issue with 177 implementation.
> 
> The types of the following properties in Part 3, SOAP Binding, are
defined
> using prose instead of wsdls:* types. I request the following
property-
> type
> associations,
> 
> {soap underlying protocol}  => wsdls:anyURI
> SOAP Module.{uri}           => wsdls:anyURI
> SOAP Module.{required}      => wsdls:boolean
> {soap fault code}           => wsdls:QName
> {soap fault subcodes}       => list of wsdls:QName
> {soap mep}                  => wsdls:anyURI
> {soap action}               => wsdls:anyURI
> 
> Rationale
> 
> (a) Consistent with Part 1 and HTTP Binding
> (b) Otherwise, we will be using two similar types (xs:QName vs.
> wsdls:QName)
> in the component model
> (c) Equivalence in Part 1 is defined using wsdl simple types
> (d) Part 3 is refuting Part 1 claim, "The component model uses a small
set
> of predefined simple types, such as boolean, string, token. In order
to
> avoid introducing a dependency on any particular serialization of the
> component model, this specification provides its own definition of
those
> types" [5]
> 
> [1]
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/issues/wsd-
> issues.html#x177
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0109.html
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0258.html
> [4]
>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?cont
en
> t-
> type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#string_type
> [5]
>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?cont
en
> t-
> type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#simpletypes
> 
> Regards,
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> asirv at webmethods dot com
> http://www.webmethods.com/
Received on Tuesday, 28 September 2004 19:29:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:31 GMT