- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 12:06:25 +0200
- Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
+1 as well. Umit Yalcinalp wrote: > > +1. > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > >> I suggest we move wsoap:code/wsoap:value to an attribute: >> >> That is, instead of: >> >> <wsoap:code> >> <wsoap:value>xs:QName</wsoap:value> >> <wsoap:subcode> >> <wsoap:value>xs:QName</wsoap:value> >> <wsoap:subcode>...</wsoap:subcode> >> </wsoap:subcode>? >> </wsoap:code> >> >> we do: >> >> <wsoap:code value="xs:QName"> >> <wsoap:subcode value="xs:QName"> >> <wsoap:subcode>...</wsoap:subcode> >> </wsoap:subcode>? >> </wsoap:code> >> >> This makes the syntax more consistent with the rest of the >> SOAP binding which is rather attribute-heavy. >> >> Sanjiva. >> >> >> >> >
Received on Monday, 3 May 2004 06:07:04 UTC