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

Re: Freshly updated draft of part1 (was: Re: Overloading [was RE: Minutes, 27 June 2002 Web Service Description Telcon])

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 22:11:47 +0600
Message-ID: <010101c21ebe$84a26550$03aa7cca@lankabook2>
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Me too!

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>; "Sanjiva Weerawarana"
<sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 10:09 PM
Subject: RE: Freshly updated draft of part1 (was: Re: Overloading [was RE:
Minutes, 27 June 2002 Web Service Description Telcon])


> That sounds fine too me.
>
> Gudge
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr]
> Sent: 28 June 2002 13:24
> To: Sanjiva Weerawarana
> Cc: Jonathan Marsh; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Freshly updated draft of part1 (was: Re: Overloading [was
> RE: Minutes, 27 June 2002 Web Service Description Telcon])
>
>
>
> Just added the following ednote. How does this sound?  --JJ
>
>       <ednote>
>         <name>JJM</name>
>         <date>20020628</date>
>         <edtext>This document is out of synch with Part 1.
>         A number of changes have been made recently to Part 1
>         which are not yet reflected in this document. The WG
>         is aware of this problem and expects to synchronise
>         Part 1 and Part 2 at a later date. More generally,
>         the sections in this document have hardly changed
>         from the corresponding sections in WSDL 1.1. This
>         may not be the case in a future revision.
>         In particular, the WG anticipates
>         that the SOAP section may change significantly
>         as a result of supporting SOAP 1.2.
>         </edtext>
>       </ednote>
>
> Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>
> > JJM: Please remember to put an ed-note on the part2 doc saying it
> > needs to be updated for this case too. (If you have one overall one
> > saying the part2 doc may not be fully up-to-date yet that's fine.) In
> > some sense the getting overall feedback on part1 is most critical at
> > this stage as we can adapt part2 to fit accordingly later ..
Received on Friday, 28 June 2002 12:12:40 GMT

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