- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:33:32 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- cc: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
+1
Jacek Kopecky
Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation
http://www.systinet.com/
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
>
> Non-editorial issues (IMO):
>
> * 33 Distinction between RPC style and document style [given current
> thread]
> * 50 Array Declaration Issues [there is a larger issue concercing arrays]
>
> Jean-Jacques.
>
> Jonathan Marsh wrote:
>
> > 8. Editorial Issues
> > Issues to be resolved by editors:
> > #7 xsd:binary in example
> > #8 Grammar for Attribute Extensibility
> > #9 Example 1 type
> > #10 Example 3 element order bug
> > #11 <import> grammar
> > #12 <part> name attribute
> > #13 Parameter Order missing from schema
> > #16 Binding operations in portType
> > #19 soap:headerfault optional?
> > #20 <soap:header> 'part' or 'parts' attribute?
> > #22 Specification not XML Infoset based
> > #33 Distinction between RPC style and document style
> > #38 Clarify the what kinds of extensibility elements go where.
> > #43 Does order matter for the child elements of "definitions"?
> > #44 "name" attribute of "soap:fault" is not defined in schema
> > #45 "use" attribute of "fault" should be optional
> > #46 "transport" attribute of "soap:binding" should be optional
> > #47 "soap:operation" should be optional
> > #48 "use" attribute of "soap:body" should be optional
> > #49 Inconsistency in "soap:header" specification
> > #50 Array Declaration Issues
> > #59 MIME Binding permits 0 parts in multipart/related
> > #60 Text in the WSDL spec inconsistency about optional parts
> >
>
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 17:33:34 UTC