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

RE: Part 1: Component reference vs. QName

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:40:57 +0100
Message-ID: <2B7789AAED12954AAD214AEAC13ACCEF2709DA60@i2km02-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <asirv@webmethods.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Asir,

AIUI fault and operations are identified using ncnames, but referenced
using qnames, since the same fault name may exist in one or more interface. 

There was some discussion of this following the proposal to hoist faults:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jan/0062.html

HTH
Paul



-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Asir Vedamuthu
Sent: 15 July 2004 13:39
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Part 1: Component reference vs. QName



In part 1 component model, the following properties (see below) appear to be
component references but, they are described as QNames. Is that intentional?

- Binding Fault Component.{fault reference} [1]
- Binding Operation Component.{operation reference} [2]

[1]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-
type=text/html%3B0charset=utf-8#Binding_Fault_details

[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-
type=text/html%3B0charset=utf-8#Binding_Operation_details

Regards,
Asir S Vedamuthu
asirv at webmethods dot com
http://www.webmethods.com/ 
Received on Thursday, 15 July 2004 09:41:21 GMT

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