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

Re: struggling with operation and message patterns writeup in spec

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:22:21 +0600
Message-ID: <045401c37eda$f7af0a80$de120209@lankabook2>
To: "Amelia A. Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hi Amy,

I wasn't making a serious proposal.. just indicating my current
gut feeling. My gut feel gotten a bit stronger since I sent that
note however.

> I'm rather cautious about this proposal.  Would we end up wanting to cut
> down on the number of patterns described, or on the detail included, if
> we were to combine the two parts?

That's a good question too - but I wouldn't want to (and am not 
trying to) cut down the number of patterns via this direction. I
was just saying that if we want to provide simplified syntax 
for the recognized patterns then its harder to split that kind of
fundamental stuff across two documents. 
 
> Doesn't having a separate part illustrate more clearly how third parties
> may define new patterns than inline definitions would?

Yes it certainly does. Again, a good question and I'm not certain
right now how best to optimize both concerns.

Sanjiva.
Received on Friday, 19 September 2003 14:25:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:26 GMT