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

Re: Action Item 2004-07-01 Solution to 168/R114

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 19:15:55 -0400
To: WS Description List <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20040708231555.GP22429@markbaker.ca>

On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 02:30:04PM -0700, Jeffrey Schlimmer wrote:
> WSDL 2.0 should not require identifying the operation name because doing
> so will unnecessarily limit the applicability of WSDL 2.0.

Sure, it would limit it to describing well designed, self-descriptive
protocols.  IMO, that would be a Very Good Thing.

Was there a particular protocol you had in mind that you wanted to be
able to describe?

Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca

  Seeking work on large scale application/data integration projects
  and/or the enabling infrastructure for same.
Received on Thursday, 8 July 2004 19:15:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:42 UTC