- From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 15:37:07 +0100
- To: "'Bjoern Hoehrmann'" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: <public-ws-chor-comments@w3.org>
Bjoern, I solicited feedback from the WG on this issue and this email seem to sum up the groups position: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor/2005Aug/0007.html Martin. >-----Original Message----- >From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:derhoermi@gmx.net] >Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 9:09 PM >To: Martin Chapman >Cc: public-ws-chor-comments@w3.org >Subject: Re: W3C WS-Choreo WG - Issue 973 > > >* Martin Chapman wrote: >>Well I can define an extension called "foo" and in the description of >>foo it could redefine the semantics of something in the cdl >namespace. >>For example "foo should be used instead of perform and its >behaviour is >>not to invoke the indicated choreography". This would not be allowed >>as it contradicts the specs definition of perform. > >Okay, so, let's say I create a XML DSig extension where an >ds:Signature element is added as last child of >cdl:choreography. Implementations of this extension are >required to ignore the cdl:choreography element if the >Signature is not valid. This would seem to contradict the >semantics of the cdl:choreography element since >implementations are not allowed to ignore it under these >conditions. So making such a XML DSig extension is not >allowed. Correct? >-- >Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · >http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · >Telefon: >+49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim >· PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ >
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2005 14:36:31 UTC