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

RE: Proposal for the removal of the message construct from WSDL 1.2

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 01:16:05 -0800
Message-ID: <92456F6B84D1324C943905BEEAE0278E02F4438E@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

My thinking is that esp. WRT attachments it would make for a very clean model if the 'secondaryPartBag' property in particular was exposed as a standard infoset property ( or set thereof ) even though the serialization would NOT necessarily be a standard XML 1.0 serialization.
 
Gudge

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr] 
	Sent: Wed 20/11/2002 03:26 
	To: Martin Gudgin 
	Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana; WS-Desc WG (Public) 
	Subject: Re: Proposal for the removal of the message construct from WSDL 1.2
	
	

	To clarify... are you suggesting that SOAP features properties
	should be (mapped to?) standard Infoset properties?
	
	Jean-Jacques.
	
	Martin Gudgin wrote:
	> That makes sense, I wonder if one could go even further and access
	> attachments via standard Infoset properties.
	>
	> Gudge
	>
	>
	>>-----Original Message-----
	>>From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr]
	>>Sent: 19 November 2002 14:14
	>>To: Martin Gudgin
	>>Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana; WS-Desc WG (Public)
	>>Subject: Re: Proposal for the removal of the message
	>>construct from WSDL 1.2
	>>
	>>
	>>+1, this is what I think the AF spec[1] was hinting at. SOAP
	>>applications would access attachment via the "secondaryPartBag"
	>>property and would not have to worry about serialization details.
	>>
	>>Jean-jacques.
	>>
	>>[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/07/SOAP-AF/aftf-soap-af.html
	>>
	>>Martin Gudgin wrote:
	>>
	>>>Personally I'd model attachments using an element decl and
	>>
	>>figure out
	>>
	>>>the actual serialization in the binding.
	>>
	>
	
	
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 04:16:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:22 GMT