Re: issue: optional parts in <message>?

"Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com> writes:
> >I disagree: if you have a message who's complexType is say
> >purchaseOrder, you wouldn't want the RPC-style stub generator
> >to expand out the top level children of that element into 
> >different arguments would you? I don't think so .. rather you
> >would want the purchaseOrder schema to be mapped to a business
> >object in whatever the language you're in and to get a method
> >which had one of those as an argument. So you would have to 
> >know whether to expand the top level type or not. 
> 
> Doesn't the parameterOrder AII tell you what should be extracted as
> top-level children for an RPC-style binding? It should be able to do
> that whether the message is described in a WSDL EII or in XML Schema.

The parameterOrder attribute is a broken feature of WSDL that should
never have been put in; it ties an abstract description of a service
to a particular binding style. 

We already have an issue recorded about that attribute (but let's hold
that discussion for now .. if we keep expanding this discussion we'll
never get anywhere!).

Sanjiva.

Received on Friday, 3 May 2002 21:06:12 UTC