Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> wrote on 05/06/2009 10:26:49 AM:
> On Wed, 6 May 2009, Katy Warr wrote:
>
> > Yves
> >
> > I guess that by 'more general' you mean that a separate fragment spec
> > would be re-usable outside the context of WS-Transfer? In theory, I
> > could imagine this might be a possibility but, in practice, I can't
think
> > of a real example. I'm concerned that we'd create an extra
specification
>
> Ok, so following the same logic, SOAP and WSDL should be in the same
spec
> and namespace, almost nobody using WSDL is not using SOAP, so it would
be
> a good match.
> I think I am not sold to that idea ;)
Be careful - to some all of the splitting we've done has really WS*/SOAP.
Personally I dislike that SOAP has so many 'parts'. I didn't see the
point
of WSA (which is so small) being split into 3. I just got thru listening
to an analyst complain about how we messed up WS* because its so
complicated
and this proliferation of specs did not help.
-Doug