W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > July 2003

Re: proposal for eliminating <message>

From: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 12:09:13 -0400
Message-ID: <00a701c34634$9b9cbcd0$f6fb000a@TPX21>
To: "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 7:14 AM
Subject: RE: proposal for eliminating <message>

> > I agree with others that it is indeed a concern of ours. Yes,
> > I am fully aware of the kinds of changes this will mean to
> > BPEL for sure, but there are other changes that affect them
> > and things like JAX-RPC too. So there's no question that
> > things that depend/build on WSDL 1.1 will have to go thru
> > major changes/upgrades as well.
> What Sanjiva says is patently true. There is so much that is changing in
> WSDL 1.2 compared to 1.1 that I am of the opinion that it is more than
> simply a point release.
> People expect point releases to look and feel mostly the same, perhaps a
> additions and a few bug fixes, but much of the excellent work that has
> happened in this group has pushed WSDL far past that. A trivial
> of the magnitude of change is the renaming of portTypes. Less trivial
> features are things like removal of message.
> If the outcome of this current round of work does indeed look
> different to WSDL 1.1 then I really think the group should consider
> it WSDL 2.0 since this would provide a clear line in the sand for the
> development community.
> The benefits are that backwards compatibility (and its myriad of
> go away. The downside is that the community might not be prepared to adopt
> such a big new step as a 2.0 version (though this is effectively what they
> will get even if it is still called 1.2).
> What do people think? Is this a legitimate move within the W3C
> Jim
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2003 12:10:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:43 UTC