- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:51:55 +0100
- To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Cc: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
Down to your specifics: one option would be to do as for namespaces, the lower layer value overrides the higher level value. However, this looks quite complicated and unnecessary. What about simply raising an error? This would be simple, and quite consistent with our inheritance model (everything allowed, but error upon conflic). What do you think? JJ. Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: >><interface name="iSvc"> >> <feature uri="foo:feature1" required="true"/> >></interface> >><binding interface="iSvc"> >> <feature uri="foo:feature1" required="false"/> >></binding> > > > Where in the spec say how these things are spsed to be combined? Without > that its hard to say what to do if what's being combined has different > @required values. If you look at the features property of binding > for example it doesn't say anything about having to compose the > properties. What should it say?
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 03:53:09 UTC