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

Re: Name AII on input/output EIIs in port type operations

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 23:31:31 +0600
Message-ID: <013801c22900$df5d2ec0$13aa7cca@lankabook2>
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

The reason those name attributes were there was to distinguish
between overloaded operations. WSDL 1.1 section 2.5 has (near
the bottom):
"An operation element within a binding specifies binding information for the
operation with the same name within the binding's portType. Since operation
names are not required to be unique (for example, in the case of overloading
of method names), the name attribute in the operation binding element might
not be enough to uniquely identify an operation. In that case, the correct
operation should be identified by providing the name attributes of the
corresponding wsdl:input and wsdl:output elements."

So when operation names are unique (i.e., no overloading) the input/output
names are not needed.

Do you not concur? We can certainly re-open the issue and discuss it more if
you like.

Bye,

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 11:06 PM
Subject: RE: Name AII on input/output EIIs in port type operations


>
> It was not clear to me on the call what the resolution of this was. My
> understanding of the 'remove overloaded operations' issue was that the
> resolution called for the spec to say something along the lines of;
>
> 'the name AIIs of all operation EIIs in a given portType must be unique'
>
> I don't recall the resolution stating that we would remove the name
> attributes from input and output.
>
> Gudge
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Gudgin
> > Sent: 11 July 2002 10:35
> > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: Name AII on input/output EIIs in port type operations
> >
> >
> >
> > Can someone point me to the e-mail/minutes where we decided
> > to remove the 'name' AII from input/output EIIs in port type
> > operations? I notice in the latest draft of the spec this AII
> > no longer appears; input/output just have a message AII.
> > Unfortunately the schema doesn't match this.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Gudge
> >
> >
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2002 13:33:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:21 GMT