www-ws-desc@w3.org from April 2002 by author

Aleksander Slominski

• Re: multipe protocols/bindings that implements serviceType [Re: slides from my presentation on issues with the core spec] (Thursday, 25 April)
• multipe protocols/bindings that implements serviceType [Re: slides from my presentation on issues with the core spec] (Thursday, 25 April)

Anne Thomas Manes

• RE: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 24 April)

Bob Cunnings

• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Saturday, 13 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Wednesday, 3 April)

Christopher Ferris

• Re: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)

Dale Moberg

• RE: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Tuesday, 30 April)
• OASIS ebXML-CPPA specification 1.9 Initial Public Review. (Tuesday, 30 April)
• RE: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Friday, 26 April)
• RE: Requirements 4.11 Security (Wednesday, 10 April)

David Booth

• Re: New wording for R001 (Thursday, 18 April)
• New wording for R001 (Thursday, 18 April)
• Clarification on proposed requirement (Friday, 12 April)

David Cleary

• RE: Open Content Model (Wednesday, 24 April)

David E. Cleary

• RE: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Wednesday, 3 April)

Eric Prud'hommeaux

• Re: Clarification on proposed requirement (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: Clarification on proposed requirement (Monday, 15 April)

Francisco Curbera

• Re: Conflicts of WSDL schemas (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Tuesday, 16 April)

Glen Daniels

• RE: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• RE: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• FW: Open Content Model (Thursday, 25 April)

Herve Ruellan

• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Friday, 5 April)

Hugo Haas

• R060: Description of message exchanges and protocol binding (Wednesday, 3 April)

Jacek Kopecky

• Draft minutes of 2002/04/25 telcon (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: New wording for R001 (Thursday, 18 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Thursday, 4 April)
• Re: Should a Service Implement a Single PortType? (Tuesday, 2 April)

Jean-Jacques Moreau

• Re: W3C WSDL WG Issues: Non-SOAP HTTP Binding (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: MIME Binding permits 0 parts in multipart/related (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Issue: Permit "message" attribute in mime:content binding (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: FW: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: HTTP Binding Issues (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Friday, 12 April)
• [Fwd: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1] (Tuesday, 9 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Tuesday, 9 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Tuesday, 9 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Friday, 5 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Friday, 5 April)
• DR028: describe SOAP 1.2 messages (Thursday, 4 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Thursday, 4 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Thursday, 4 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Thursday, 4 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Wednesday, 3 April)
• Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Wednesday, 3 April)
• Re: alternative format for WSDL that is SOAP compatible (Tuesday, 2 April)
• Re: alternative format for WSDL that is SOAP compatible (Tuesday, 2 April)

Jeffrey Schlimmer

• Extending port types (AKA a scenario for UPnP) (Tuesday, 30 April)
• W3C WSDL WG: 6b. Define encoding for non-ASCII characters in request URL (Tuesday, 30 April)
• Issues 6a, 6d, 41. Define encoding into a request URL (Saturday, 27 April)
• W3C WSDL WG Issues: Non-SOAP HTTP Binding (Saturday, 27 April)
• RE: Open Content Model (Thursday, 25 April)
• W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Wednesday, 24 April)
• RE: New wording for R001 (Tuesday, 23 April)
• W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Friday, 5 April)
• RE: R067 and R967a: extensibility (Friday, 5 April)
• RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Friday, 5 April)
• RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Friday, 5 April)
• W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Wednesday, 3 April)
• RE: Higher-level support for SOAP extensions/modules (Wednesday, 3 April)

Jonathan Marsh

• Ann: Web Service Description Requirements published (Monday, 29 April)
• URI Escaping and IRIs (was Issues 6a, 6d, 41. Define encoding into a request URL) (Monday, 29 April)
• XLANG, WSFL response on solicit-response and output-only (Friday, 26 April)
• RE: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• RE: Open Content Model (Wednesday, 24 April)
• RE: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Agenda for 2002-04-25 WS Description WG (Wednesday, 24 April)
• RE: Open Content Model (Tuesday, 23 April)
• RE: HTTP Binding Issues (Monday, 22 April)
• RE: IRC (Monday, 22 April)
• RE: minutes from April 18 (Monday, 22 April)
• RE: Web Services Description WG April 2002 F2F Minutes (Friday, 19 April)
• Web Services Description Working Group 2002-04-04 (real!) meeting minutes (Thursday, 18 April)
• Web Services Description Working Group 2002-03-28 meeting minutes (was -04-04 minutes) (Thursday, 18 April)
• Web Services Description WG April 2002 F2F Minutes (Thursday, 18 April)
• Slightly cleaned up Requirements Document 20020417 (Wednesday, 17 April)
• RE: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Draft Requirements doc reflecting FTF decisions. (Friday, 12 April)
• Snapshot of Requirements draft after Apr 11th decisions (Friday, 12 April)
• Web Services Description Working Group 2002-04-04 meeting minutes (Tuesday, 9 April)
• Revised Agenda April 10-12 Face-to-face meeting. (Tuesday, 9 April)
• Requirements 4.12 and 5 draft disposition (Tuesday, 9 April)
• RE: Orchestration (was: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements) (Monday, 8 April)
• RE: WS Description Status Report 1 April 2002 (Monday, 1 April)
• WS Description Status Report 1 April 2002 (Monday, 1 April)

Keith Ballinger

• RE: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Open Content Model (Tuesday, 23 April)
• slides for interop issues talk (Friday, 12 April)
• slides for WSDl, NE (Friday, 12 April)

Liu, Kevin

• Conflicts of WSDL schemas (Friday, 26 April)

Malu, Pallavi G

• RE: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18 , 20 02 (Wednesday, 24 April)
• RE: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Thursday, 18 April)
• RE: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• RE: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• RE: Initial impression about requirements placed by WSCL on WSDL (Tuesday, 9 April)

Mark Baker

• Re: Suggested integration requirement (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Suggested integration requirement (Monday, 15 April)

Martin Gudgin

• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: Requirements 4.1 General draft disposition (Thursday, 11 April)
• Requirements 4.1 General draft disposition (Wednesday, 10 April)

Matt Long

• RE: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)

michael.mahan@nokia.com

• introduction (Thursday, 18 April)

Paul Prescod

• HTTP Binding Issues (Saturday, 20 April)
• Re: Web Services Description WG April 2002 F2F Minutes (Friday, 19 April)
• Re: Web Services Description WG April 2002 F2F Minutes (Friday, 19 April)

Philippe Le Hegaret

• Re: Agenda for 2002-04-25 WS Description WG (Thursday, 25 April)
• Re: slides for WSDl, NE (Friday, 12 April)

Prasad Yendluri

• Re: Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: Why should not there be a relationship among ports in a Service? (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages (Friday, 26 April)
• Write up question for XLANG and/or WSFL groups whether they need solicit-response. (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18, 20 02 (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Saturday, 20 April)
• Re: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18 , 20 02 (Saturday, 20 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Issue: Permit "message" attribute in mime:content binding (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Issue: MIME Binding permits 0 parts in multipart/related (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Issue: Why should not there be a relationship among ports in a Service? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)

Roberto Chinnici

• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Friday, 19 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Wednesday, 17 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: Should a Service Implement a Single PortType? (Wednesday, 3 April)
• Re: Should a Service Implement a Single PortType? (Tuesday, 2 April)

ryman@ca.ibm.com

• Use Case: Storage and Retrieval of WSDL in Registries and Repositories (Friday, 12 April)
• Re: Collecting issues against WSDL 1.1 (Wednesday, 10 April)
• Re: Should a Service Implement a Single PortType? (Tuesday, 2 April)

Sadiq, Waqar

• Regrets for May 2 telecon (Tuesday, 30 April)
• Late regrets (Thursday, 25 April)
• Use cases (Monday, 22 April)
• Usecase document (Monday, 22 April)
• RE: Candidate use cases for removal from Use Case document (Saturday, 20 April)
• Candidate use cases for removal from Use Case document (Friday, 19 April)
• F2F (Wednesday, 10 April)
• RE: Orchestration (was: W3C Web Service Description WG: Require ments) (Wednesday, 10 April)
• Initial impression about requirements placed by WSCL on WSDL (Tuesday, 9 April)
• RE: Orchestration (was: W3C Web Service Description WG: Require ments) (Monday, 8 April)

Sandeep Kumar

• RE: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Tuesday, 16 April)

Sanjiva Weerawarana

• import / include issue (Tuesday, 30 April)
• updated part1 docs (editor's drafts) (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Draft minutes of 2002/04/25 telcon (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: Why should not there be a relationship among ports in a Service? (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Issue: Support for optionality of parts in Messages (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Draft minutes of 2002/04/25 telcon (Monday, 29 April)
• Re: Conflicts of WSDL schemas (Sunday, 28 April)
• Re: Issue: Should Operations permit alternate and multiple responses (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Issue: Why should not there be a relationship among ports in a Service? (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)
• Re: multipe protocols/bindings that implements serviceType [Re: slides from my presentation on issues with the core spec] (Thursday, 25 April)
• Re: Open Content Model (Thursday, 25 April)
• Re: Open Content Model (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18 , 20 02 (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Wednesday, 24 April)
• Re: Suggested integration requirement (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Sunday, 14 April)
• slides from my presentation on issues with the core spec (Saturday, 13 April)
• issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Saturday, 13 April)
• current editors' draft of the WSDL 1.2 core spec (Saturday, 13 April)
• issue: remove solicit-response and output-only operations? (Saturday, 13 April)
• Re: Orchestration (was: W3C Web Service Description WG: Require ments) (Tuesday, 9 April)

Sedukhin, Igor

• RE: Draft minutes of 2002/04/25 telcon (Monday, 29 April)
• RE: minutes from April 18 (Monday, 22 April)
• RE: Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18 , 20 02 (Friday, 19 April)
• RE: Candidate use cases for removal from Use Case document (Friday, 19 April)
• RE: R067 and R967a: extensibility (Friday, 5 April)
• RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Friday, 5 April)
• RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Thursday, 4 April)
• R067 and R967a: extensibility (Thursday, 4 April)

Simon Fell

• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using ncnames? (Saturday, 13 April)

Simon Horrell

• Re: Open Content Model (Friday, 26 April)

Steve Graham

• Re: multipe protocols/bindings that implements serviceType [Re: slides from my presentation on issues with the core spec] (Thursday, 25 April)

Stumbo, William K

• IRC (Monday, 22 April)
• Draft Requirements Section 4.5 recommendations (Tuesday, 9 April)

Swearingen Sandra Civ AFCA/ITCM

• Regrets for 2 May and 9 May teleconferences (Monday, 29 April)

Tom Jordahl

• RE: minutes from April 18 (Monday, 22 April)
• Web Services Description Conference call minutes for April 18, 20 02 (Thursday, 18 April)

Uche Ogbuji

• Re: Clarification on proposed requirement (Tuesday, 16 April)
• Re: Clarification on proposed requirement (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: Clarification on proposed requirement (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: Clarification on proposed requirement (Monday, 15 April)
• Re: [rdfws] Re: RDF mapping for WSDL (Thursday, 4 April)

VAMBENEPE,WILLIAM (HP-Cupertino,ex1)

• RE: Orchestration (was: W3C Web Service Description WG: Require ments) (Monday, 8 April)
• RE: W3C Web Service Description WG: Requirements (Friday, 5 April)

Last message date: Tuesday, 30 April 2002 19:34:20 UTC