RE: 2004-02-12 Action Item: Clarification to the OperationName feature from Jim Webber on 2004-02-23 (www-ws-desc@w3.org from February 2004)

From: Jim Webber <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 00:35:47 -0000
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <37E80E80B681A24B8F768D607373CA801CD24C@largo.campus.ncl.ac.uk>

Mark:

We will be chastised for bringnig this up again, but:

> Well, there is an operation, because the message is requesting that
> *something* be done, no?  Not including it in the message 
> just makes the message less self-descriptive than the 
> alternative of putting the operation name in it.  I like 
> self-descriptiveness, so I want to see it there.

No, the message is just flowing to an endpoint. What happens to it there
is out of scope. All WSDL does is tell you what the message must look
like.

Jim

Received on Sunday, 22 February 2004 19:36:27 UTC