- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 00:16:31 +0600
- To: "WS-Desc WG \(Public\)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <089e01c20f18$9fdb8230$02aa7cca@lankabook2>
I promised during the telecon on Thu to send out a proposal for resolving these issues. My apologies for the delay- attached please find a short proposal for introducing the concept of a <serviceType> as a first-class WSDL concept. Off to Paris in 3 hrs (and hopefully to sleep before that!!). Sanjiva. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:47 AM Subject: Fw: issue: service type > > I posted this a while back, but there was literally no discussion > that I can recall. Is this issue so boring?? > > Also related is the following: > <issue id="issue-multiple-services"> > <head>Should a single WSDL file only define one service?</head> > WSDL 1.1 suppports having multiple services in a single WSDL > file. This has caused confusion amongst users. > <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source> > </issue> > > Anyone with opinions or can I resolve it myself? ;-) > > Sanjiva. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> > To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 6:29 AM > Subject: issue: service type > > > > I would like to open discussion on the following issue: > > > > <issue id="issue-service-type"> > > <head>Should we have an abstract view of a service?</head> > > WSDL defines a service as a collection of ports, but there is no > > abstract analog. > > <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source> > > </issue> > > > > > > Sanjiva. > >
Attachments
- text/html attachment: portTypes-2002-06-09.html
Received on Saturday, 8 June 2002 14:17:19 UTC