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

RE: Why single-interface is broken

From: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 16:50:48 -0700
Message-ID: <DDE1793D7266AD488BB4F5E8D38EACB8011940FA@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: "Amelia A. Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>, "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
On
> 
> Redundancy is *bad*.  Specifying interface twice is *bad*.  If it's
> going to happen at all, error-handling MUST be specified in sufficient
> detail that two processors faced with the same description report the
> same thing.

I don't disagree with your other points, but want to point out that
there is a proposal on the table to eliminate the specification of an
interface (was portType) on the binding to eliminate the redundancy
between the service/@interface and binding/@interface.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003May/0046.html

--Jeff
Received on Friday, 30 May 2003 19:50:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:24 GMT