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

Re: question about interface/operation/@style and interface/@styl eDefault

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 00:34:10 +0600
Message-ID: <02aa01c4053b$f721bfd0$c8d418ac@watson.ibm.com>
To: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Committed to editor's draft.

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:12 PM
Subject: RE: question about interface/operation/@style and interface/@styl
eDefault


>
>
> +1
>
> No reason why style can't apply to other type systems.
>
> --
> Tom Jordahl
> Macromedia
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 11:02 PM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: question about interface/operation/@style and
> interface/@styleDefault
>
>
> With the decision to support multiple type systems yesterday, I'd
> like to clarify how it affects @style. The current wording for
> @style is specific to schema languages which define elements:
>
> =====
> If the {style} property of an Interface Operation component has a
> value then that value (a URI) implies the rules that were used
> to define the {message} properties of all {message reference}s
> within that component. Note that the property MAY not have any
> value. If this property has a given value, then the rules
> implied by that value (such as rules that govern the schemas)
> MUST be followed or it is an error.
> =====
>
> (Replace {message} by {element} when u read the above.)
>
> Do we want to generalize this to say something like "{element}
> or other property which defines the content of the message"?
> It seems to me that we should as otherwise we'd be short-changing
> the support for multiple schema languages.
>
> IMO it is still fine for the *RPC style* to be defined specifically
> for XML Schema (as it is now).
>
> Comments?
>
> Sanjiva.
Received on Monday, 8 March 2004 13:34:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:30 GMT