W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > September 2002

RE: service references (was: Re: WSA diffs from REST)

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 07:40:42 -0700
To: "'Sanjiva Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <03fe01c263d8$5d0c2d00$0100007f@beasys.com>

> > Better I use tone now then wait around and have the TAG
> mandate a deep
> > rewrite of WSDL later.
> :-)
> I personally don't take the TAG as controlling authority to
> that extent.
> If they do that, we should spank the TAGsters amongst us for not
> keeping is abreast enough of fundamental flaws that we're just too
> damn dumb to get; where's DaveO?
> But that's just me.

Je suis ici.  I also don't think of the TAG as that controlling.  I think
that WG's should do what they feel best, given time/functionality/quality
trade-offs.  The TAG can and should nudge WG's.  But the TAG mandating a
deep rewrite of a spec when next to no member companies raised it as an
issue seems unlikely.  I suggest that we drop discussions about what the TAG
would/wouldn't do from this.

Personally, I have much sympathy for Paul's position.  Heck, I even
suggested to Paul last wednesday night that he raise it.  Though I believe I
also suggested a proposed solution would help.  It seems to me like the WSDL
group is taking this issue up with some serious interest.  I've always liked
the idea of passing PortRefs around - though there are some issues around
mapping the non-URI parts (ie parameters) into subsequent run-time messages.
Seems to me that the issue is being looked at.  I think we should take this
off WS-arch and into wsdl.

Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2002 10:44:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:59 UTC