- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: 27 Sep 2002 17:48:31 -0400
- To: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 17:03, ryman@ca.ibm.com wrote: > > Eric, > > WSDL syntax is modelled on XSD in the sense that in XSD you can have a type > and an element that have the same name. What is the recommended solution > for XSD? Shouldn't WSDL follow that for simplicity? And we ended up having a type attribute and an element attribute in the WSDL part element, so I don't think that following XSD here sets a good example at all. A proposal for simplicity [1] advocates to add a complexType wrapper element construction in WSDL in order to eliminate the element attribute. We cannot change XSD but we can still change WSDL. Philippe [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Sep/0055.html
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 17:48:43 UTC