public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org from May 2005 by date

Tuesday, 31 May 2005

• RE: Clarification needed: Part 3 sec 2.8.1 and 2.8.2: soap fault codes David Booth
• Re: LC84a: Operation Name Mapping Requirement is ambiguous David Booth

Monday, 30 May 2005

• real players Jasmine Fields

Saturday, 28 May 2005

• Re: LC84a: Operation Name Mapping Requirement is ambiguous Jonathan Marsh
• RE: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments Jonathan Marsh
• RE: The description of wsdli:wsdlLocation attribute is limiting (Editorial Item) Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Clarification for wsdl:required attribute needed Jonathan Marsh
• RE: {message label} property of Binding Message Reference Component Should be REQUIRED Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial: Setting Default Values Jonathan Marsh
• RE: wsdl:import semantics is different from xs:import Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Clarification needed: Part 3 sec 2.8.1 and 2.8.2: soap fault codes Jonathan Marsh
• RE: XML Schema comment on WSDL 2.0 Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Pluggability of Schema Languages in WSDL Jonathan Marsh
• RE: URI References for Schema Components Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Mixing Schema Languages Jonathan Marsh

Friday, 27 May 2005

• RE: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments Jonathan Marsh
• Re: Comments Rich Salz
• Re: Comments Arthur Ryman
• Re: Comments Rich Salz
• RE: Comments Jonathan Marsh

Tuesday, 24 May 2005

• Re: Comments Rich Salz
• RE: Comments Jonathan Marsh
• Re: Comments Rich Salz
• Re: Comments Rich Salz
• RE: Comments Jonathan Marsh

Monday, 23 May 2005

• RE: Message Reference Component is Underspecified Jonathan Marsh

Saturday, 21 May 2005

• Re: Raising an ugly issue again Anne Thomas Manes

Tuesday, 17 May 2005

• RE: Clarify whether Parts 2 & 3 MUST be supported David Booth
• RE: typo David Booth

Saturday, 21 May 2005

• RE: Editorial: In section 2.15.3, "and" should be "or" David Booth
• RE: Editorial: Typos David Booth
• RE: Another part 1 typo David Booth
• RE: Editorial: Ambiguous use of the terms "include" and "import" David Booth
• RE: Contradictions regarding transitivity of wsdl:import David Booth
• RE: Misc Part1 editorial issues David Booth
• RE: a WSDL whatsit? (conformance terminology) David Booth
• RE: Raising an ugly issue again Jonathan Marsh
• RE: The WSDL 2.0 XSD for Root Element is Too Loose Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Proposed Changes to the Interface Component, Features and Properties Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Action 2004-11-11 check on operation@style (LC61a) (or REOPEN LC21 Resolution B) Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Multiple input and output elements for an operation Jonathan Marsh
• RE: HTTP Error code for faults (part3, sec 3.7) Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Idle question Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Raising an ugly issue again Jonathan Marsh
• RE: New LC issue: XML Schema required (appears twice) Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Feature and Property Composition for Binding Operation Omits Interface Operation Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Faults that are not described in WSDL? Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Is schemaLocation Required When Importing Inline Schemas? Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Part 3, SOAP Binding - Editorial Issues Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Message Reference Component is Underspecified Jonathan Marsh
• RE: a WSDL whatsit? (conformance terminology) Jonathan Marsh
• RE: New Issue RPC Style (and proposed fix) Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Misc Part1 editorial issues Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Consistency of WSDL Component property names Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial: Ambiguous use of the terms "include" and "import" Jonathan Marsh
• RE: MEP template Jonathan Marsh
• RE: WSDL 2.0 Part3, Sec. 3.4 Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Another part 1 typo Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Contradictions regarding transitivity of wsdl:import Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial Comment: wsdl:include Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial: Typos Jonathan Marsh
• RE: LC107 and Inconsistent Component Names Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial: In section 2.15.3, "and" should be "or" Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Component Designators - what's the unique identifier? Jonathan Marsh
• RE: The Component Model Does Not Enforce Component Nesting Jonathan Marsh
• RE: The Component Model is Underconstrained wrt the WSDL 2.0 Schema Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Extension Components are not Described Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial comments on WSDL 2.0 Part 1 Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Message Exchange Patterns -- p2c and/or p2e David Booth
• RE: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments Jonathan Marsh

Friday, 20 May 2005

• RE: Mixing Schema Languages Jonathan Marsh

Friday, 13 May 2005

• Re: Can multiple inline schemas have same targetNamespace? Jeehong Min
• RE: XMLP Review of WSDL 2.0 Part 2 LC WD michael.mahan@nokia.com
• RE: wsdl:include semantics is different from xs:include Jonathan Marsh
• RE: XML Schema comment "T2" on WSDL 2.0 Jonathan Marsh
• RE: issues with wsdl:endpoint@address Jonathan Marsh
• RE: comments on the wsdl 2.0 working drafts Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Can multiple inline schemas have same targetNamespace? Jonathan Marsh

Thursday, 12 May 2005

• FW: binding/operation/infault|outfault? Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Clarificatioin for binding fault Jonathan Marsh
• RE: WSDL Last Call issue Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Optional predefined features in Part 2 Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Message Exchange Patterns -- p2c and/or p2e Jonathan Marsh
• RE: binding/operation/infault|outfault? Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Editorial last call review comments Jacek Kopecky
• RE: QA Review on WSDL 2.0 Part 1, intro and conformance issues Dominique Hazaël-Massieux
• RE: QA Review on WSDL 2.0 Part 1, Editorial comments Dominique Hazaël-Massieux

Wednesday, 11 May 2005

• RE: XForms comments on (WSDL) Version 2.0 Part 3: Bindings Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Last call review comments Jonathan Marsh
• RE: WSDL2.0 Last Call comments Jonathan Marsh

Friday, 6 May 2005

• RE: mustUnderstand" - ?? Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: URI Style and SOAP Response Pattern Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: HTTP Transfer Coding and 1.0 Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Property Composition Edge Cases Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Feature Composition Edge Cases Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: re; Editorial: Typo in Section 3.7.3 Part 2 - HTTP Fault Asir Vedamuthu

Thursday, 5 May 2005

• RE: mustUnderstand" - ?? Jonathan Marsh
• RE: URI Style and SOAP Response Pattern Jonathan Marsh
• RE: QA Review on WSDL 2.0 Part 1, intro and conformance issues Jonathan Marsh
• Re: Resolution of LC89e Rich Salz
• Resolution of LC89e Glen Daniels

Tuesday, 3 May 2005

• RE: Clarify whether Parts 2 & 3 MUST be supported Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Issue: describing the HTTP error text for faults Jonathan Marsh
• RE: HTTP Transfer Coding and 1.0 Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Property Composition Edge Cases Jonathan Marsh
• RE: Feature Composition Edge Cases Jonathan Marsh

Last message date: Tuesday, 31 May 2005 14:01:42 UTC