- From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:51:58 +0100
- To: rob@socialchange.net.au, public-sws-ig <public-sws-ig@w3.org>
Now, this should stand in contrast to something like javadoc which any java developer I have ever met will use in most cases before jumping into another form of understanding of a library... Le 13 nov. 04, à 00:44, Rob Atkinson a écrit : > * metadata that isnt actually exercised by the person entering the > data tends to be, as we Aussies say "ordinary" [...] > * documentation is not a scalable mechanism in its own right - you > really need classification via controlled vocabularies - I.e. the > human readable view of an ontology. Well... yes... but let's talk about the realistic scale of current developers handling a handful of services. What can they read ? (this question is not even answered, to my taste, at current WSDL/SOAP developers) paul [...] > So, IMHO you are on the right track about the need for another layer > of documentation to make the syntactical schemas work in practice, > however I think that at most the documentation should be harvested > from an external source that can be dereferenced by the declared > object types. This external source would be the artefact you would > query to find or understand the nature of the service.
Received on Monday, 15 November 2004 13:52:38 UTC