www-ws-desc@w3.org from November 2003 by date

Tuesday, 25 November 2003

• proposal for combining the two attribute operation styles to one Jacek Kopecky

Friday, 21 November 2003

• Re: Agenda, 20 November 2003 WS Desc telcon Mark Baker
• RE: Agenda, 20 November 2003 WS Desc telcon Jonathan Marsh

Thursday, 20 November 2003

• Today's log Bijan Parsia
• RE: should binding/operation/infault|outfault@messageReference be optional? Jeffrey Schlimmer

Wednesday, 19 November 2003

• RE: HTTP binding options Jeffrey Schlimmer
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• RE: HTTP binding options Jeffrey Schlimmer
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Jeffrey Schlimmer
• Re: Agenda, 20 November 2003 WS Desc telcon Mark Baker
• Agenda, 20 November 2003 WS Desc telcon Jonathan Marsh

Monday, 17 November 2003

• Re: HTTP binding options FABLET Youenn

Saturday, 15 November 2003

• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Glen Daniels
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Martin Gudgin

Friday, 14 November 2003

• Re: Primer example & ambiguity issue Mark Baker
• Re: Primer example & ambiguity issue Glen Daniels
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Amelia A. Lewis
• Primer example & ambiguity issue Mark Baker
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Glen Daniels
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Glen Daniels
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Martin Gudgin
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Jacek Kopecky
• Re: on WSDL 2.0 Part 1: Core Language, 031110 Amelia A. Lewis
• on WSDL 2.0 Part 1: Core Language, 031110 Yuxiao Zhao
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Sanjiva Weerawarana
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL paul.downey@bt.com
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Glen Daniels
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Tom Jordahl
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Jacek Kopecky
• Minutes: 13 Nov 2003 WS Description Teleconference Jeffrey Schlimmer

Thursday, 13 November 2003

• Re: Action item (2003-10-30) Proposed Revised wording and splitti ng of rules for RPC Umit Yalcinalp
• RE: Action item (2003-10-30) Proposed Revised wording and splitti ng of rules for RPC Liu, Kevin
• RE: Revisiting WSDL Compontent Designators David Orchard
• Fw: RE: Circular includes Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: proposal for simplifying interface extensions David Booth
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Jacek Kopecky
• RE: Revisiting WSDL Compontent Designators Sedukhin, Igor S
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Martin Gudgin
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Glen Daniels
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Sanjiva Weerawarana
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Allen Brookes
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• Re: Marking WSDL operations as "safe", in scope requirement? Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: HTTP binding options Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: HTTP binding options Jean-Jacques Moreau
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Tom Jordahl
• Re: HTTP binding options Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: HTTP binding options FABLET Youenn
• Re: HTTP binding options Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: Schemas in imported WSDL Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• RE: should binding/operation/infault|outfault@messageReference be opt ional? Liu, Kevin
• RE: HTTP binding options David Orchard
• RE: Schemas in imported WSDL Martin Gudgin
• Schemas in imported WSDL Allen Brookes

Wednesday, 12 November 2003

• RE: HTTP binding options paul.downey@bt.com
• Re: HTTP binding options Jacek Kopecky
• RE: HTTP binding options paul.downey@bt.com
• Suggest TAG/WSD WG liaison meeting at tech plenary David Orchard
• Marking WSDL operations as "safe", in scope requirement? David Orchard
• RE: Revisiting WSDL Compontent Designators David Orchard
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• RE: HTTP binding options Jeffrey Schlimmer
• RE: HTTP binding options David Orchard
• Re: HTTP binding options Glen Daniels
• RE: HTTP binding options David Orchard
• RE: HTTP binding options Jeffrey Schlimmer
• RE: HTTP binding options David Orchard
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! David Booth
• RE: HTTP binding options Jeffrey Schlimmer
• RE: should binding/operation/infault|outfault@messageReference be opt ional? Jeffrey Schlimmer
• RE: HTTP binding options Jeffrey Schlimmer

Tuesday, 11 November 2003

• Agenda, 13 November 2003 WS Desc telcon Jonathan Marsh
• Revisiting WSDL Compontent Designators Jonathan Marsh
• Re: New issue [distobj@acm.org: Re: What does WSDL describe?] Mark Baker
• RE: New issue [distobj@acm.org: Re: What does WSDL describe?] Jonathan Marsh
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Savas Parastatidis

Monday, 10 November 2003

• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! David Booth
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! David Booth
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• RE: HTTP binding options Champion, Mike
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• WSDL 2.0: Core Language and Message Patterns updated Philippe Le Hegaret
• Re: HTTP binding options Roberto Chinnici
• should binding/operation/infault|outfault@messageReference be opt ional? Liu, Kevin
• RE: HTTP binding options David Orchard
• RE: HTTP binding options David Orchard
• Re: HTTP binding options Philippe Le Hegaret
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• Re: HTTP binding options Philippe Le Hegaret
• Re: HTTP binding options Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: A schema for each mep? FABLET Youenn
• Re: A schema for each mep? Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault ( MTF) equivalent Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: HTTP binding options Philippe Le Hegaret
• Re: HTTP binding options Mark Baker
• Re: HTTP binding options Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: HTTP binding options Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: HTTP binding options FABLET Youenn
• A schema for each mep? FABLET Youenn

Saturday, 8 November 2003

• RE: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault ( MTF) equivalent Liu, Kevin

Friday, 7 November 2003

• Summary: 3-5 Nov 2003 WS Description FTF Jonathan Marsh
• Minutes: 5 Nov 2003 WS Description FTF Jonathan Marsh
• Minutes: 4 Nov 2003 WS Description FTF Jonathan Marsh
• Minutes: 3 Nov 2003 WS Description FTF Jonathan Marsh
• Re: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault ( MTF) equivalent Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: HTTP binding options Philippe Le Hegaret
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Sedukhin, Igor S
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Martin Gudgin
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Sanjiva Weerawarana
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Martin Gudgin
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! David Booth
• RE: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault ( MTF) equivalent Liu, Kevin

Thursday, 6 November 2003

• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Glen Daniels
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Martin Gudgin
• HTTP binding options Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! David Booth
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Mark Baker

Wednesday, 5 November 2003

• Re: Counterproposal for service references Arthur Ryman
• Re: Counterproposal for service references Umit Yalcinalp
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! David Booth
• The Department Directory Use Case Using <wsdl:reference> Arthur Ryman
• Re: Counterproposal for service references Arthur Ryman
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Mark Baker
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! paul.downey@bt.com

Tuesday, 4 November 2003

• Attributes Task Force Presentation for F2F Umit Yalcinalp
• The Department Directory: A Use Case for Abstract Interfaces in Service References Arthur Ryman
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Mark Baker
• RE: Attributes in WSDL Savas Parastatidis
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Savas Parastatidis
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! paul.downey@bt.com
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Anne Thomas Manes
• Re: Attributes in WSDL David Snelling
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Mark Baker
• RE: What WSDL defines - the diagram! paul.downey@bt.com
• Re: What WSDL defines - the diagram! Mark Baker
• What WSDL defines - the diagram! paul.downey@bt.com

Monday, 3 November 2003

• Re: Action item (2003-10-30) Proposed Revised wording and splitting of rules for RPC Jacek Kopecky
• interface/operation/{infault,outfault}/@name proposal Jeffrey Schlimmer
• RE: RPC Style Issues (3) Jacek Kopecky
• Re: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault (MTF) equivalent Amelia A. Lewis
• RE: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault (MTF) equivalent Anne Thomas Manes
• RE: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault (MTF) equivalent paul.downey@bt.com
• Re: ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL: Short-cut syntax for in-out and in-only patterns Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: editorial question: change NS prefixes in bindings doc? Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault (MTF) equivalent Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL: Short-cut syntax for in-out and in-only patterns Amelia A. Lewis
• Re: RPC Style Issues Part (1) - spec updated Sanjiva Weerawarana
• RE: are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault (MTF) equivalent paul.downey@bt.com

Sunday, 2 November 2003

• PROPOSAL: SOAP binding syntax cleanup Sanjiva Weerawarana

Monday, 3 November 2003

• ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL: Short-cut syntax for in-out and in-only patterns Jean-Jacques Moreau
• Re: editorial question: change NS prefixes in bindings doc? Jean-Jacques Moreau
• RE: editorial question: change NS prefixes in bindings doc? Jeffrey Schlimmer

Sunday, 2 November 2003

• editorial question: change NS prefixes in bindings doc? Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: RPC Style Issues Part (1) - spec updated Umit Yalcinalp
• Re: RPC Style Issues (3) Umit Yalcinalp
• Action item (2003-10-30) Proposed Revised wording and splitting of rules for RPC Umit Yalcinalp
• RE: Attributes in WSDL Jim Webber
• RE: What does WSDL describe? Jim Webber
• RE: What does WSDL describe? Jim Webber
• are fault-replaces-message (FRM) and message-triggers-fault (MTF) equivalent Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: RPC Style Issues Part (2) - spec updated Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: RPC Style Issues Part (1) - spec updated Sanjiva Weerawarana
• Re: RE: RPC Style Issues (3) Sanjiva Weerawarana

Last message date: Tuesday, 25 November 2003 11:26:40 UTC