- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:53:31 +0600
- To: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
ARGH! Major +1 to Tom .. don't fix what ain't broken. Sanjiva. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com> To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 7:37 PM Subject: RE: Issue 225: accommodating non-XML data models (proposal) > > Mark wrote: > > 4) Throughout - Change instances of "element declaration" to "content > > declaration", the {element} property to {content}, and instances of the > > "element" Attribute Information Item to "content". > > Amy wrote in response: > > Hmm. 13 instances of "{element}", 27 of "element declaration". Harder to > > count instances of "element" attribute information item. But this AII is > > associated with XML Schema, is it not? Do we *really* need to change it? > > Again? The element AII appears in faults and in messages. In messages, > > I would not be in favor of resolving issue 225 by make the kind of change > that Mark is proposing. It strikes me that this could have a major ripple > effect throughout the specification at a very bad time. > > It also seems that changes like these make the spec much more obscure for a > use case that has not been proven to be a requirement. Didn't we (or the > architecture working group) define a Web Service to specifically include > XML? > > -- > Tom Jordahl > Macromedia Server Development >
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2004 09:52:18 UTC