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

RE: updated draft to put F&P in more places

From: Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:50:03 -0400
Message-ID: <CB1FF0A474AEA84EA0206D5B05F6A4CB08E84022@S1001EXM02.macromedia.com>
To: "'Sanjiva Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>


Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote on Friday, June 25, 2004 1:32 PM:

> I've updated the draft per the telecon decision yesterday to put
> F&P in a few more places. Please review.
>
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html
> 
> I note (with disgust) that we're severly discriminating against
> Interface Fault components and Binding Fault components by not 
> allowing them to contain F&P (properties). Poor suckers.

In for a little, in for the whole thing, eh?  I can't remember if we
approved putting F&P in these as well, but it looks like we have to.


> One comment about ordering of F&P and other elements within their 
> parent elements: we seem to be a bit inconsistent about what order
> these can appear w.r.t. their siblings. I'd appreciate if someone
> could check that careful and make a recommendation for a consistent
> approach.

I would recommend putting them consistently at the top of the element along
with the documentation element.  The reading flow would be: here is a
binding, here are some comments, here are the features, here are the
properties, here are the operations, etc...


--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia
Received on Monday, 12 July 2004 11:50:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:32 GMT