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

Re: Idle question

From: Amelia A Lewis <alewis@tibco.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:48:05 -0400
To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-id: <20041026144805.09f5bd8a.alewis@tibco.com>

I don't understand that answer.

I'm working on implementation, and one of the areas of implementation is
import (and include; *sigh* that include was included).  It is natural
enough that WSDL 1.1 cannot import WSDL 2.0.  Is it true that WSDL 2.0
cannot import or include WSDL 1.1?  This seems a painful limitation
(although it makes the work go faster).  If it *can*, what are the
semantics of the included components?

It would probably be enough to say "WSDL 2.0 documents cannot import or
include WSDL 1.1 documents" to clarify the situation.  I *do* think we
need a clarification, though, because as it stands, the import/include
descriptions talk about including WSDL, not just WSDL 2.0.

Amy!
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:11:37 +0600
Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> wrote:

> You can of course import it but since those elems would simply be
> extension elements ...
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
> To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:47 PM
> Subject: Idle question
> 
> 
> > 
> > Heylas,
> > 
> > So, can a WSDL 2.0 document import or include a WSDL 1.1 document?
> > 
> > Presumably, 1.1 cannot import 2.0.
> > 
> > Amy!
> > -- 
> > Amelia A. Lewis
> > Senior Architect
> > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> > alewis@tibco.com


-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Senior Architect
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:48:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT