- From: Mike Deem <mikedeem@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 18:29:39 -0700
- To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sorry. I'll get those links fixed. [1] should work. See section 6. In any case, the idea is to use a mediaType annotation element in a restriction on a base64Binary or hexBinary base type. This annotation is used in the style of a facet to constrain the media type of the binary data. == Mike == [1] http://gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/dime/WSDL-Extension-for-DIME.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 6:19 PM > To: Mike Deem; Jeffrey Schlimmer; www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: Re: issue: optional parts in <message>? > > Hi Mike, > > Your link's broken (in fact all the links in the DIME/WSDL spec > are broken), but I looked in there and don't quite see it. Can > you please just post here the precise syntax for an operation > whose input message has two parts: a string and an image/gif. > > Thanks! > > Sanjiva. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Deem" <mikedeem@microsoft.com> > To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; "Jeffrey Schlimmer" > <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 7:13 AM > Subject: RE: issue: optional parts in <message>? > > > > See [1] for an example of how this can be done. > > > > == Mike == > > > > [1] > > http://indigo-sd/docs/bluebook/encapsulation/WSDL-Extension-for-DIME.doc > > _generated.htm#wsdl-extension-for-dime__toc7968299 > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] > > > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 6:01 PM > > > To: Jeffrey Schlimmer; www-ws-desc@w3.org > > > Subject: Re: issue: optional parts in <message>? > > > > > > "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com> > > > > > > > > It would be nice if common interoperable representational types were > > > > described in a way that could be leveraged across all the XML > > > > activities, even those that do not use WSDL. Of course, if there > > wasn't > > > > a way to define "foreign" types in XML Schema, working groups like > > ours > > > > would be forced to come with their own "first class" definitions, > > but > > > > that doesn't seem to be the case any longer. > > > > > > I am not a schema expert- could you please show the syntax for how > > > I would define a MIME type using XSD? See how it can be done easily > > > will help alleviate this aspect of my concerns at least! > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Sanjiva. > > >
Received on Friday, 3 May 2002 21:30:12 UTC