W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages

From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:59:24 -0700
Message-ID: <3CCDA61B.FAF6B2A8@webmethods.com>
To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
CC: www-ws-desc@w3.org


Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:

> FYI: This is covered by the following issue already in the
> document:

Looks like it. Please merge any useful parts from my description (e.g.
usecase) into the original issue. Thanks.

>
>
> <issue id="issue-message-parts">
>   <head>Should the message part mechanism be extended to support optional
>         parts etc.?</head>
>   In WSDL 1.1, a message can only be defined to be a sequence of parts.
>   It is not possible to indicate that certain parts may be optional,
>   may occur multiple times, etc.? Should we do that? Overlapping with
>   XML Schema's mechanisms is an obvious concern.
>   <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>
> </issue>
>
> Sanjiva.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Prasad Yendluri" <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
> To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 7:35 AM
> Subject: Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages
>
> > After thinking a little more, it seems to me this would be a useful
> > addition.
> >
> > Usecase: A response message could optionally return one or more
> > "attachments".
> >
> > We do have an example of having attachments in the MIME binding section
> > of the specification (Section 5.11 Example 7) but, there is no way to
> > specify those as optional with variable cardinality (minoccurs,
> > maxoccurs). The example claims these are optional in the description
> > part but, neither the "message" definitions (A 4.1 WSDL schema) nor the
> > MIME bindings ( 4.4 MIME binding Schema) permit this.
> >
> > Regards, Prasad
> >
> >
Received on Monday, 29 April 2002 15:56:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:19 GMT