- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:51:35 -0000
- To: <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Cc: <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
This forms the basis of a concern we have with the WS-I process: what is the road-map for migrating from Basic Profile 1.0 services towards those using SOAP 1.2 and WSDL 2.0 ? Paul -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jean-Jacques Moreau Sent: 17 March 2004 09:16 To: Sanjiva Weerawarana Cc: Jonathan Marsh; WS Description List Subject: Re: Issue 32: Will SOAP 1.1 still be supported? No disagreement with having the binding. My point is simply about where the binding actually appears, i.e. directly in Part 3 or in a companion Note. JJ. Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > I'd say there is a strong reason .. people will actually use WSDL2 > much faster if we have a SOAP 1.1 binding :-). > > I don't think its a lot of work .. do you? > > Sanjiva. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr> > To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> > Cc: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 2:43 PM > Subject: Re: Issue 32: Will SOAP 1.1 still be supported? > > > >>Is there any strong reason for including this binding in Part3? Could it >>be published as a Note instead? >> >>JJ. >> >>Jonathan Marsh wrote: >> >> >>>Per our new charter the answer is yes. I recommend we close this issue >>>as obsolete, and solicit a volunteer for an action item to draft a soap >>>1.1 binding for us to discuss. >>> > >
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 05:52:10 UTC