- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 22:37:12 +0100
- To: <public-ws-desc-state@w3.org>
[snip] > > Diving into the meaning of @access, it is not clear to me what the value > of > "set" really implies. Do we want "write only attributes"? Can someone > come up with a compelling use case for this? Perhaps @access should > become > @readOnly which is a Boolean with default="true". @readonly="true" is > equivalent to @access="get", @readonly="false" is equivalent to > @access="both". There is no equivalent to @access="set". > Although I don't feel strongly about this, I believe that we shouldn't restrict interface designers that wish to have set-only attributes. This is not an example for a service interface but still... <interface name="PersonInterface"> <attribute name="FirstName" type="xsd:string" access="set"/> <attribute name="LastName" type="xsd:string" access="set"/> <attribute name="FullName" type="xsd:string" access="get"/> </interface> Or <interface name="ATMInterface"> <operation name="Authenticate" body="tns:AuthenticatePersonWithPasswdMsg"/> <attribute name="password" type="xsd:string" access="set"/> </interface> You can only set the password but you cannot retrieve it. [snip] .savas.
Received on Sunday, 20 July 2003 17:37:18 UTC