W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > October 2003

RE: Media types handling in WSDL 1.2

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 16:24:57 -0700
Message-ID: <DF1BAFBC28DF694A823C9A8400E71EA2018D9D6A@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

We have not yet begun work on the SOAP 1.2 binding in earnest, though I
keep saying that we hope to soon!  I'll venture a wild guess that we
would start looking at MTOM in the January timeframe.  There might be
some opportunity for sharing ideas at the Tech plenary in March.

And of course, we would want MTOM to go to Rec at the same time or
before WSDL 2.0, although we don't have a firm idea of when that is.
Comparing the work loads of the two groups I don't see how WSDL could
finish much in advance of MTOM :-).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Fallside [mailto:fallside@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 4:14 PM
> To: Jonathan Marsh; Philippe Le Hegaret
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Media types handling in WSDL 1.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Approximately when will you will need details of MTOM in order to
include
> it in WSDL 2.0?
> 
> ............................................
> David C. Fallside, IBM
> Data Management Standards
> Tel 530.477.7169 (TL 544.9665)
> fallside@us.ibm.com
> 
> 
> 
> |---------+---------------------------->
> |         |           "Jonathan Marsh" |
> |         |           <jmarsh@microsoft|
> |         |           .com>            |
> |         |           Sent by:         |
> |         |           xml-dist-app-requ|
> |         |           est@w3.org       |
> |         |                            |
> |         |                            |
> |         |           10/23/2003 11:58 |
> |         |           AM               |
> |---------+---------------------------->
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------------------|
>   |
> |
>   |       To:       "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, "Philippe Le
> Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>                                      |
>   |       cc:       <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> |
>   |       Subject:  RE: Media types handling in WSDL 1.2
> |
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------------------|
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The WSDesc WG discussed this item at our telcon, and confirmed that we
> do expect to support MTOM in WSDL 2.0.  We adopted a requirement that
> says (essentially) that the description language MUST be able to
> describe messages using the MTOM attachments mechanism, if the MTOM
work
> is completed in time for inclusion in WSDL 2.0.
> 
> We look forward to working with you on this.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marc Hadley [mailto:Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 12:20 PM
> > To: Jonathan Marsh; Philippe Le Hegaret
> > Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Media types handling in WSDL 1.2
> >
> > Jonathan, Philippe,
> >
> > You didn't respond to my previous note below. I've been asked by the
> > XMLP WG to try once more to obtain an answer. If you don't respond
> > within a week we'll assume your silence means that you do not intend
> to
> > tackle the description side of MTOM in the WSD WG.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Marc.
> >
> > On Wednesday, Oct 8, 2003, at 16:37 US/Eastern, Marc Hadley wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Jonathan, Philippe,
> > >
> > > I have an action from the XMLP WG to follow up on the recent
> > > discussions regarding WSD support for attachments. Are you able to
> > > confirm that the WSD WG is going to tackle the description side of
> the
> > > MTOM (nee PASWA) work currently underway in the XMLP WG ?
> > >
> > > Thanks for any information.
> > > Marc.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Friday, Sep 26, 2003, at 11:21 US/Eastern, Marc Hadley wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> On Wednesday, Sep 17, 2003, at 14:33 US/Eastern, Philippe Le
> Hegaret
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 13:57, Marc Hadley wrote:
> > >>>> Does the involvement of the ws-desc WG mean that the XMLP WG
can
> > >>>> skip
> > >>>> working on the description oriented parts of PASWA ?
> > >>>
> > >>> I certainly don't want to do the work on the XMLP WG :)
> > >>
> > >> And similarly I don't want to do the work of the ws-desc WG ;-).
> > >>
> > >>> The reality is: the technical decisions of the WSD WG for
> embedding
> > >>> media types in XML Schema will impact on the work done in the
XMLP
> > >>> WG.
> > >>> Since the reverse is true, both WGs need to be aware of their
work
> > >>> and
> > >>> make sure we coordinate on it and reach the same conclusions.
> > >>>
> > >> I agree and +1 Mark's comment[1] that I think we need a cross WG
> task
> > >> force of some kind.
> > >>
> > >> Marc.
> > >>
> > >> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/mid/09D54A43-E944-11D7-9930-00039396E15A@bea.com
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
> > >> Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > --
> > > Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
> > > Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
> > Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
> >
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 19:30:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:15 GMT