- From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:53:15 -0500
- To: Harris Reynolds <hreynolds@webmethods.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
On Dec 2, 2004, at 7:14 PM, Harris Reynolds wrote: > > Despite the TAG finding regarding this kind of issue [4], it seems > that this is a case where using a QName is much more natural. For now > I am +1 on changing the Relationship type to anyUri and -1 on changing > the wsdl:portTypes and wsdl:service QNames to URIs. > I pretty much agree, changing the relationship type is a no-brainer, coming up with our own mapping of QName to URI for naming WSDL constructs is OTT. Marc. --- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 15:53:21 UTC