> -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:59 PM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: RE: Minutes of W3C WSDWG Conference Call, June 26th, 2003 > > > > We did not drop @targetResource, although we considered it (and were > close). There is concern that this and the diagrams we added to our > spec are generating non-converging discussion, and that the > diagrams are > not central to the purpose of WSDL in describing the flow of messages > into and out from a Web service. Likewise targetResource is > solely for > purposes of discovery (out of scope according to our charter). Those > are at least the questions I thought we were debating when we > ran out of > time. > Gotcha, sorry for my confusion. I was asking about "<sanjiva> JM point 1: anyone against removing @targetResource <sdl-scribe> no one on call seems to object". Thanks for the clarification, Dave ps. I won't ask for the definition of discovery that precludes identifying a resource :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:25 GMT