- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 07:40:42 -0700
- To: "'Sanjiva Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> > Better I use tone now then wait around and have the TAG > mandate a deep > > rewrite of WSDL later. > > :-) > > I personally don't take the TAG as controlling authority to > that extent. > If they do that, we should spank the TAGsters amongst us for not > keeping is abreast enough of fundamental flaws that we're just too > damn dumb to get; where's DaveO? > > But that's just me. > Je suis ici. I also don't think of the TAG as that controlling. I think that WG's should do what they feel best, given time/functionality/quality trade-offs. The TAG can and should nudge WG's. But the TAG mandating a deep rewrite of a spec when next to no member companies raised it as an issue seems unlikely. I suggest that we drop discussions about what the TAG would/wouldn't do from this. Personally, I have much sympathy for Paul's position. Heck, I even suggested to Paul last wednesday night that he raise it. Though I believe I also suggested a proposed solution would help. It seems to me like the WSDL group is taking this issue up with some serious interest. I've always liked the idea of passing PortRefs around - though there are some issues around mapping the non-URI parts (ie parameters) into subsequent run-time messages. Seems to me that the issue is being looked at. I think we should take this off WS-arch and into wsdl. Cheers, Dave
Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2002 10:44:21 UTC