Re: proposal: make binding/operation/(input|output)/@messageLabel optional

+1.  I'm not terribly fond of the optionality of the labels, but it *is*
clearly unambiguous, so Sanjiva and Tom are right to want to make it
easier for authors.  This should be extended to binding as well, for the
sake of consistency, and because otherwise people *will* make mistakes,
due to the incompatibility in definition.

Amy!
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:48:18 +0600
Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> wrote:

> 
> I know we discussed this before but the way things are is not
> consistent. If there's exactly one input or output message in a
> MEP there's no need to have the @messageLabel in binding either.
> 
> Can we please re-consider this? Look at the syntax summary
> section and you'll see what I mean:
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html#Syntax-S
> ummary
> 
> I'd like to make the attribute optional and keep the same rules
> as with interface/operation/(input|output)/@messageLabel.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 


-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Architect/Principal Engineer
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com