W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2006

Action Item 2006-02-16

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:31:58 -0800
Message-ID: <2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D6416501199175@uspale20.pal.sap.corp>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Folks, 

I reviewed the assertions in Section 4, Predefined Styles. I did not see
any issues.  I would like to make an observation, though. This is
independent of whether the assertions are accurate/well captured. 

We decided to allow extension attributes that are not part of the
signature for RPC style. I noticed that neither the IRI style nor the
multipart style have a similar allowance. I believe we included this
allowance to RPC style to put metadata assertions as attributes for the
signature. Similar metadata may be useful for the other styles, but I do
not have any use cases. 

--umit


----------------------

Dr. Umit Yalcinalp
Architect
NetWeaver Industry Standards
SAP Labs, LLC
Email: umit.yalcinalp@sap.com Tel: (650) 320-3095 
SDN: https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/u/36238
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2006 10:30:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:38 GMT