W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > April 2004

Issue 64, @method

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 00:09:31 -0500
To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Cc: WS Description List <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20040404050931.GK7760@markbaker.ca>

On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 04:29:23PM -0800, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> Marsh:   issue is can one get away without operation names when 
>          using HTTP.
> Sanjiva: drop issue
> DaveO:   is he just proposing that the HTTP operations be described 
>          as wsdl operations?
> ACTION:  Marsh to contact Mark Baker and see if @method satisfies
>          him.

While @method and the whole HTTP binding are welcome progress, I don't
believe they address issue 64.  But yours and DaveO's comment there hit
the nail on the head, IMO.  I think there's some useful ideas in my
earlier proposal, which was to do exactly what DaveO is suggesting (and
not just for HTTP, but for all application protocols).

Perhaps you guys could give it a re-read-over and let me know if you
think any of the options described there are do-able, or alternately
if you have some other ideas for how it might be done ...


Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2004 00:12:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:48 UTC