W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > June 2005

RE: Part 2 editorial issue: "binding" versus "binding extension"

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:46:26 -0700
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A507ED8EFC@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Booth" <dbooth@hp.com>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>

The WG accepted the editor's resolution of this issue (LC122 [1]). You
can see the results at [2].  We'll assume you accept this resolution if
we don't hear from you within two weeks.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC122
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.
html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-desc-
> comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Booth
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 7:23 AM
> To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Part 2 editorial issue: "binding" versus "binding extension"
> 
> 
> Part 2 sometimes uses the term "binding" when it should say "binding
> extension".  A "binding" is a wsdl: construct that employs a
> particular
> "binding extension", such as the WSDL 2.0 SOAP Binding Extension.
> 
> Also, typo:
> Part 2 Sec 5: s/associated the message/associated with the message/
> 
> 
> --
> 
> David Booth
> 
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2005 18:46:53 GMT

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