public-ws-semann@w3.org from June 2006 by date

Friday, 30 June 2006

• Issue 23: relationship of interface annotations in face of interface extension Kunal Verma
• regrets Joel Farrell
• What does modelReference on wsdl:interface mean ? Kunal Verma

Wednesday, 28 June 2006

• Draft minutes of telcon 2006/06/27 Jacek Kopecky

Monday, 26 June 2006

• Resolutions from f2f documented for review Joel Farrell
• Agenda for SAWSDL telcon 2006/06/27 Jacek Kopecky
• Summary and draft minutes of f2f meeting 2006/06/20-21 Jacek Kopecky

Friday, 23 June 2006

• [issue10] what about multiple categories ? Pierre.CHATEL@fr.thalesgroup.com

Thursday, 22 June 2006

• [issue 10] can you give more details ? Pierre Chatel

Wednesday, 21 June 2006

• Re: [Updated Draft v1.3] SAWSDL to UDDI and WSDL 2.0 to UDDI mapping Carine Bournez

Tuesday, 20 June 2006

• [Updated Draft v1.3] SAWSDL to UDDI and WSDL 2.0 to UDDI mapping Pierre Chatel
• RE: issue 1 resolution Pierre.CHATEL@fr.thalesgroup.com

Monday, 19 June 2006

• Re: issue 1 resolution Holger Lausen

Thursday, 15 June 2006

• issue 1 resolution Pierre.CHATEL@fr.thalesgroup.com
• [pierre.chatel@fr.thalesgroup.com: [Moderator Action (size limit exceeded)] [Updated Draft v1.1] SAWSDL to UDDI and WSDL 2.0 to UDDI mapping] Carine Bournez
• Issues 18 and 6 (partial) have been documented Joel Farrell

Tuesday, 13 June 2006

• Draft minutes of telcon 2006/06/13 Jacek Kopecky
• Re: issue 18: Relation of multiple modelReferences Jacek Kopecky
• First draft of SAWSDL to UDDI and WSDL 2.0 to UDDI mapping Carine Bournez
• Re: Documentation of Issue 5 and 6 Joel Farrell
• Re: Agenda for SAWSDL telcon 2006/06/13 Jacek Kopecky
• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Laurent Henocque
• Re: Documentation of Issue 5 and 6 Laurent Henocque
• Re: Issue : should mappings be bijections? what happens if they are not? Laurent Henocque
• Re: issue 18: Relation of multiple modelReferences Laurent Henocque
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11): allowing internal and external ModelReferences on the same element Laurent Henocque
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Laurent Henocque

Monday, 12 June 2006

• Action Item: RDFS ontology for interface Kunal Verma
• RE: SAWSDL Category [section 2.3 of Semantic Annotations for WSDL ] Pierre.CHATEL@fr.thalesgroup.com
• issue 18: Relation of multiple modelReferences Jacek Kopecky
• Agenda for SAWSDL telcon 2006/06/13 Jacek Kopecky
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: SAWSDL Category [section 2.3 of Semantic Annotations for WSDL] Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Mapping SAWSDL/WSDL-S into UDDI Pierre.CHATEL@fr.thalesgroup.com
• Re: Mapping SAWSDL/WSDL-S into UDDI Jacek Kopecky
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11): allowing internal and external ModelReferences on the same element Jacek Kopecky

Sunday, 11 June 2006

• Re: SAWSDL and "effects" Bijan Parsia

Saturday, 10 June 2006

• Re: SAWSDL and "effects" Jacek Kopecky

Thursday, 8 June 2006

• SAWSDL and "effects" Jim Hendler
• SAWSDL Category [section 2.3 of Semantic Annotations for WSDL] Pierre Châtel
• Documentation of Issue 5 and 6 Joel Farrell
• Draft minutes of telcon 2006/06/06 Jacek Kopecky

Tuesday, 6 June 2006

• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Laurent Henocque
• Fwd: Generating test data sets Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Mapping SAWSDL/WSDL-S into UDDI Farrukh Najmi
• Mapping SAWSDL/WSDL-S into UDDI Pierre.CHATEL@fr.thalesgroup.com
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11): allowing internal and external ModelReferences on the same element Amit Sheth @ LSDIS
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Kunal Verma
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Joel Farrell
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Issue : should mappings be bijections? what happens if they are not? Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Issue : should mappings be bijections? what happens if they are not? Jacek Kopecky
• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Laurent Henocque
• Issue : should mappings be bijections? what happens if they are not? Laurent Henocque
• Regrets Tomas Vitvar
• Re: action on category vs modelReference Laurent Henocque

Monday, 5 June 2006

• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Rama Akkiraju
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Rama Akkiraju
• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Rama Akkiraju
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Kunal Verma
• Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Rama Akkiraju
• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Kunal Verma
• Agenda for SAWSDL telcon 2006/06/06 Jacek Kopecky
• why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: action on category vs modelReference Jacek Kopecky
• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Consistency Issues in multiple modelReferences Jacek Kopecky
• Re: email headers (was Re: ACTION 07) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: Issue 2 documented Jacek Kopecky

Sunday, 4 June 2006

• Re: schemaMapping issues breakdown (issue 6) Rama Akkiraju

Last message date: Friday, 30 June 2006 21:09:19 UTC