W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2004

Re: 2004-02-12 Action Item: Clarification to the OperationName feature

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:00:35 -0500
To: Jim Webber <Jim.Webber@newcastle.ac.uk>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040222210035.S15631@www.markbaker.ca>

Ah, right, it's that one again. 8-)

But as I think I must have said before, you seem to be trying to make
WSDL be something that it isn't.  That may or may not be a good thing
to do, but every use of WSDL I've seen uses it describe application
interfaces, so that's where my comments are coming from.


On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 12:35:47AM -0000, Jim Webber wrote:
> 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

Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Sunday, 22 February 2004 20:59:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:38 UTC