RE: use of wsoap: vs. wsoap12:

I laugh that ns prefixes are purely editorial!  That doesn't take away from the reasonable action btw.

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 10:42 PM
> To: Martin Gudgin; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Re: use of wsoap: vs. wsoap12:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep that's right .. just an NS prefix; so purely editorial to make
> the docs consistent.
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
> To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; 
> <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 8:10 AM
> Subject: RE: use of wsoap: vs. wsoap12:
> 
> 
> > This is an editorial suggestion for the spec, right? We're 
> not saying
> > that people HAVE to use these prefixes in their WSDL 
> documents, are we?
> > 
> > Gudge 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> > > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva 
> Weerawarana
> > > Sent: 16 May 2004 04:59
> > > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > > Subject: use of wsoap: vs. wsoap12:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > In the bindings doc we say wsoap: for the SOAP binding 
> > > elements. However,
> > > in the part1 doc we say the SOAP 1.2 binding will use 
> wsoap12 as the
> > > prefix.
> > > 
> > > I'd like to change the part1 doc to say that the WSDL 2.0 
> > > defined SOAP 1.2
> > > binding will use the wsoap: prefix. 
> > > 
> > > If someone defines a SOAP 1.1 binding then we can ask 
> that they use 
> > > wsoap11 ..
> > > 
> > > Any objections?
> > > 
> > > Sanjiva.
> > > 
> > >
> 
>