- 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, Dave 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