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

issue 37: Should we remove parameter order?

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 12:45:12 +0600
Message-ID: <022301c2184b$ae2131a0$82a6a409@lankabook2>
To: "WS-Desc WG \(Public\)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

I would like to close the following issue in favor of the same
one in the part1 doc:

  <issue>
    <issue-num>37</issue-num>
    <title>Should we remove parameter order?</title>
    <locus>Spec</locus>
    <requirement>n/a</requirement>
    <priority>Design</priority>
    <topic></topic>
    <status>Active</status>
    <originator><a href="mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com">Sanjiva
Weerawarana</a></originator>
    <responsible>Unassigned</responsible>
    <description>
    [<a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Apr/0029.html">ema
il</a>]
    [See also issue 13]
    While parameter order is specified at a portType level, in the SOAP
case,
    whether the binding is an RPC binding or not is not specified until
later.
    Thus, the information is misplaced at best.
    </description>
    <proposal>
    </proposal>
    <resolution>
    </resolution>
  </issue>

The corresponding issue in the part1 doc is:

<issue id="issue-remove-parameter-order">
  <head>Should we remove parameter order?</head>
  While parameter order is specified at a portType level, in
  the SOAP case, whether the binding is an RPC binding or
  not is not specified until later. Thus, the information is
  misplaced at best.
  <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>
</issue>

Any objections?

Sanjiva.
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2002 07:15:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:20 GMT