- From: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:54:03 -0800
- To: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
This issue was first discussed in my note http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Nov/0128.html It recommended that the syntax of the identifiers - wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(portType/operation/message) - wsdl11.portTypeOperationFault(portType/operation/fault) be changed to - wsdl11.portTypeMessageInput(portType/operation) - wsdl11.portTypeMessageOutput(portType/operation) - wsdl11.portTypeMessageFault(portType/operation) Similar changes were recommended for the corresponding identifiers for the binding element. David Orchard argued that the syntax was designed to align with the WSDL 2.0 syntax. So, I asked the WSDL 2.0 WG for their opinion. They explained their rationale in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Dec/0092.html Jonathan Marsh expressed their opinion succinctly as "The WG expressed no preference on whether your suggested redesign was a benefit for WSDL 1.1 component designators, where there isn't support for MEP extensibility. We note that if consistency with WSDL 2.0 component designators is paramount, keeping this redundant information in the format would be desirable. Yet if simplicity is paramount, removing the redundant information as you suggest would be natural." Thus, we need to answer Jonathan's question above and take the appropriate decision. All the best, Ashok
Received on Wednesday, 17 January 2007 18:55:35 UTC