- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:48:17 -0700
- To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 30 August 2006 20:48:43 UTC
Thanks for your comment, and apologizes for reporting our resolution so belatedly. The WS Description Working Group tracked this issue as a CR023 [1]. The Working Group accepted your proposal, though this resolution has not yet been reflected in the latest draft. Unless you let us know otherwise by the end of September, we will assume you agree with the resolution of this issue. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR023 ________________________________ From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 8:01 PM To: www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: typeDefinitions property optional? Section 2.1.2 defines the typeDefinitions property as optional, but then states that it contains the build-in simple types from Schema. I think the result is that it's really not optional at all. Should we change it to REQUIRED? Also, we might also mention in the mapping that this is the minimum, contrary to the minimum suggested there. [ Jonathan Marsh ][ jmarsh@microsoft.com <mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com> ][ http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes <http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes> ]
Received on Wednesday, 30 August 2006 20:48:43 UTC