- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 20:40:40 -0500
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
FYI, I just sent this response; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Feb/0030.html which said; ] I also wanted to point out issue 64, which was submitted after that ] summary was composed; ] ] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/issues/wsd-issues.html#x64 ] ] I believe its implications are relevant to the HTTP binding, the WSDL ] binding mechanism, and other application protocol bindings, as I ] described last month; ] ] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jan/0103 ] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jan/0111 ] ] FWIW, its relationship to issue 53 is quite interesting; in order ] for WSDL to fully support application protocols, it's not enough ] to merely permit an operation to be associated with a "verb", but ] what's needed is for the WSDL operation to *be* the verb. MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 20:38:09 UTC