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

RE: Review of WSDL 2.0 - RDF Mapping

From: Tom Jordahl <tjordahl@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:42:16 -0800
Message-ID: <AD0C8E6047016B48A53660CD4888CE39607564@namail4.corp.adobe.com>
To: "Booth, David \(HP Software - Boston\)" <dbooth@hp.com>
Cc: "WS-Description WG" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

> English prose for this.  (Oh, why didn't we listen to Tom Jordahl's
> pleas for simplicity? ;) )

Yeah! Why didn't you?  Is it too late?

:-)

--
Tom Jordahl
Adobe ColdFusion Team

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 6:34 PM
To: Jonathan Marsh; Jacek Kopecky
Cc: Bijan Parsia; WS-Description WG
Subject: RE: Review of WSDL 2.0 - RDF Mapping


Hmm, well since Jacek is planning on doing the XSLT anyway -- Go Jacek!
-- maybe we should see what the resulting XSLT looks like before
deciding whether it should become normative.  If it ends up being much
more complex and messy than the equivalent English prose -- and
therefore much more likely to contain bugs -- then I would (sadly)
agree.  

But, gee, if XSLT isn't up to this task, then what is?  It would seem
like an indictment of XSLT and/or WSDL 2.0 if we have to revert to
English prose for this.  (Oh, why didn't we listen to Tom Jordahl's
pleas for simplicity? ;) )

David Booth
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2006 14:42:44 GMT

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