RE: issue 38: Clarify the what kinds of extensibility elements go where

+1

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 2:42 AM
> To: WS-Desc WG (Public)
> Subject: issue 38: Clarify the what kinds of extensibility elements go
> where
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to request that we close the following issue as
> its redundant with another issue in the part1 spec (see below):
> 
>   <issue>
>     <issue-num>38</issue-num>
>     <title>Clarify the what kinds of extensibility elements go
> where.</title>
>     <locus>Spec</locus>
>     <requirement>n/a</requirement>
>     <priority>Editorial</priority>
>     <topic></topic>
>     <status>Active</status>
>     <originator><a href="mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com">Sanjiva
> Weerawarana</a></originator>
>     <responsible>Unassigned</responsible>
>     <description>
>     [<a
> href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ws-desc/2002Apr/
> 0029.html">ema
> il</a>]
>     There is confusion in the user community about what should go in a
> binding
>     vs. a port vs. a service in terms of extensibility.
>     An approach could be to that data marshalling type 
> extensions go in
>     a binding and transport stuff goes in to a port and anything else
>     goes into a service.
>     </description>
>     <proposal>
>     </proposal>
>     <resolution>
>     </resolution>
>   </issue>
> 
> The issue in the part1 spec is:
> 
> <issue id="issue-clarify-elements">
>   <head>Clarify the what kinds of extensibility elements go 
> where.</head>
>   There is confusion in the user community about what should go in a
>   binding vs. a port vs. a service in terms of extensibility. An
>   approach could be to that data marshalling type extensions go in
>   a binding and transport stuff goes in to a port and anything else
>   goes into a service.
>   <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source>
> </issue>
> 
> Sanjiva.
>

Received on Thursday, 20 June 2002 10:35:03 UTC