W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2003

RE: Minutes of W3C WSDWG Conference Call, June 26th, 2003

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 13:05:44 -0700
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <016f01c33c1e$54394270$7106a8c0@beasys.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:59 PM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Minutes of W3C WSDWG Conference Call, June 26th, 2003
> We did not drop @targetResource, although we considered it (and were
> close).  There is concern that this and the diagrams we added to our
> spec are generating non-converging discussion, and that the 
> diagrams are
> not central to the purpose of WSDL in describing the flow of messages
> into and out from a Web service.  Likewise targetResource is 
> solely for
> purposes of discovery (out of scope according to our charter).  Those
> are at least the questions I thought we were debating when we 
> ran out of
> time.

Gotcha, sorry for my confusion.  I was asking about 
"<sanjiva> JM point 1: anyone against removing @targetResource 
<sdl-scribe> no one on call seems to object".

Thanks for the clarification,

ps. I won't ask for the definition of discovery that precludes identifying a
resource :-)

Received on Thursday, 26 June 2003 16:05:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:30 UTC