RE: example using features and properties

(sorry for the late reply)

My little nit with this is that I don't think the <feature> elements are needed in the bindings (at least the SOAP/HTTP one) - don't the bindings themselves already indicate that those features are supplied?  My take on the <feature required="true"> usage is that it's for placement in the "abstract" section of the WSDL, to indicate that some concrete implementation (either a binding or a SOAP module) must exist for that feature.  What do you think?

--Glen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 5:29 AM
> To: Philippe Le Hegaret
> Cc: public-ws-pnf-tf@w3.org; Martin Gudgin
> Subject: Re: example using features and properties
> 
> 
> 
> Ouah! features and properties in real use! (I even note the 
> great care, 
> capitalizing the 2nd "Action" only.)
> 
> One little knit: it's a pity we can't factor out properties into the 
> interface. Maybe another need for Gudge multiple level 
> binding proposal?
> 
> JJ.
> 
> Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> 
> > same place, same time (and we'll be more active hopefully).
> > 
> > For an unrelated forum, I wrote a "WSDL 1.2" document that 
> uses SOAP 1.2
> > and HTTP bindings. It relies on the use of features and 
> properties. Here
> > is a link if people want to have a look:
> > http://www.w3.org/2003/04/14-Validator.wsdl
> > 
> > Philippe
> > 
> > 
>