- From: Ahmed, Zahid <zahid.ahmed@commerceone.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:43:40 -0800
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Sorry this e-mail was dsitributed three times [due to W3C mail server problem which evidently has now been fixed...]. -----Original Message----- From: Ahmed, Zahid [mailto:zahid.ahmed@commerceone.com] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:18 AM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: RE: Long owed Description stack words > In Heather's draft of the description stack, it is stated > that: > >This service interface definition would define WSDL type(s), > >message(s), portType(s) and binding(s). > > Issue: > Should we move the binding description to WSDL implementation > document, i.e., be part of the concrete description of WSDL > document rather than abstract? > > My understanding is that abstract definition part of a > WSDL document does not need to include a binding description > component, instead it includes types, messages, and > portTypes only. > > However, WSDL implementation documents, which could import > such interface/abstract WSDL descriptions, will contain binding > description and service description. > > This is in conflict with the classification of WSDL > interface and implementation documents (both in text and > in diagram #4). > > Lastly, is this description stack in sync of WSDL 1.2 > or just WSDL 1.1? > > thanks, > Zahid > -----Original Message----- From: Heather Kreger [mailto:kreger@us.ibm.com] Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 2:57 PM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Long owed Description stack words Here is a draft of some description stack words, I hope they are in time for the editors to incorporate before the F2F. (See attached file: HKsContribution.description.htm) here are the diagrams (See attached file: descriptionstack.zip) sorry about the attachment Heather Kreger Web Services Lead Architect STSM, SWG Emerging Technology kreger@us.ibm.com 919-543-3211 (t/l 441) cell:919-496-9572
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 18:45:02 UTC