W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2002

Re: issue-intra-port-relationship (was ..Freshly updated draft of part1 (was: Re: Overloading [was RE: Minutes, 27 June 2002 Web Service Description Telcon]))

From: Steve Tuecke <tuecke@mcs.anl.gov>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 08:34:59 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org

The other bit related to this is how a service refers to the serviceType 
that it implements, via the type attribute on the service 
element.  However, section 2.6  is missing a description of the type attribute.


At 09:11 PM 6/28/2002, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:

>"Prasad Yendluri" <pyendluri@webmethods.com> writes:
> > I have also seen proposals limiting one service per WSDL. If that makes
> > through this restriction would not only restrict one from putting such
> > related ports not only in the same service but also in the same WSDL as
> > they need to be in separate services. Given the other restriction that
> > was proposed in the conference call that every WSDL MUST have a unique
> > targetNamespace, it will result in these not being in the same
> > targetNamespace as well..
>We resolved the multiple services issue too at the F2F saying you
>can have >= 1 service(s) in a single WSDL document. I was pushing to
>have a single (complete) doc restricted to exactly one serviceType
>but >=1 service(s), all of that single serviceType, but didn't get
>much (any?) support for it.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Prasad Yendluri" <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
>To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; "Jonathan Marsh"
><jmarsh@microsoft.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
>Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 1:06 AM
>Subject: Re: issue-intra-port-relationship (was ..Freshly updated draft of
>part1 (was: Re: Overloading [was RE: Minutes, 27 June 2002 Web Service
>Description Telcon]))
Received on Saturday, 29 June 2002 09:48:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:24 UTC