- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 16:49:26 +0200
- To: Amy Lewis <alewis@tibco.com>
- CC: dbooth@w3.org, public-ws-desc-meps@w3.org, youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr
I'm still somewhat puzzled. (Although I think I agree.) Let me try to paraphrase. WSDL must support more than SOAP. So, at the interface level, we need to use WSDL patterns, not SOAP MEPs. In bindings other than the SOAP binding, we need to support MEPs other than the SOAP MEPs. In the SOAP binding, of course, we need to support SOAP MEPs. The MEPs used in a particular binding must be compatible with the WSDL patterns used in the corresponding interface/operation. Maybe this is more than paraphrasing; maybe the above are requirements. Jean-Jacques. Amy Lewis wrote: > Sorry. > > If WSDL supports more than SOAP (as I believe that it does), then we > must support message exchange patterns that they define. We cannot > restrict the set of available MEPs at the binding level to only those > defined by SOAP, because WSDL supports binding styles other than SOAP. > > Amy! > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:31:53 +0200 > "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr> wrote: > > >>I'm lost by the double negative (can't-only). Didn't you mean >>something different? >> >>Jean-Jacques. >> >>Amy Lewis wrote: >> >> >>>We can't mandate SOAP MEPs only at the binding level, if we plan to >>>support bindings other than SOAP. Can we? >> >> >> > >
Received on Friday, 27 June 2003 10:50:00 UTC