Re: Minutes, 8 July 2004 WS Desc telcon

The minutes don't state what the scope of this decision was; was 225  
closed without *further* action (i.e., the first and third proposals in  
the referenced e-mails were accepted last week; were those decisions  
overturned?) or was it just that the change to <types> voted down?

I'm confused because my second proposal -- which should have been on  
the table here -- didn't mention the 'element declarations' property at  
all; it was a simple syntactic change to the Infoset representation of  
the component model.

Could someone please clarify what happened, since the WG decided to  
close this issue when I wasn't on the call?

Thanks.


On Jul 8, 2004, at 11:32 AM, Jonathan Marsh wrote:

> 13. Issue 225: Non-XML type system extensibility. [.1]
>   - Mark's revised proposals [.2]
>   - Mark's proposals for <types> [.3]
>
> [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x225
> [.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0174.html
> [.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0050.html
>
> Marsh:  Summarises Mark's proposal
> <sanjiva> +1 to what Gudge just said .. that's my recollection too.
> Gudge:  Types that contain any type description not compatible
>         with elements, then definitions component would have a
>         new property.  Sees no reason to change 'element declarations'
>         property.
> <sanjiva> See
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/ 
> wsdl20.html#othe
> r-types
> Marsh:  Close issue with no action?
> <sanjiva> Section 3.2 of the current draft has the words describing
>           how non-xml type systems will work in WSDL 2.0.
> RESOLUTION: close 225 with no action
>

--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems

Received on Monday, 12 July 2004 15:06:05 UTC