- From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 10:21:17 -0400
- To: "'Martin Gudgin'" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "'Arthur Ryman'" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>, "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> processContents='lax' seems to be the 'sweet spot' here as it > allows me to validate a WSDL document even if I don't have > schemas for all the extensions therein. I don't want > validation to fail just because I don't have an extension schema. +1 - validate where you can, don't worry where you can't, and wsdl:required tells you where you better not fail to grok things. Seems right to me. --Glen
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 10:21:51 UTC