- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 15:57:26 -0000
- To: <alewis@tibco.com>, <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Hi Amy! > So I'll correct my statement: it can't be validated using existing XML > Schema tools; it's effectively a different schema language with a > passing resemblance to XML Schema. i'm puzzled how this really differs from the AD feature? i personally have been discouraging our folks from using header in WSDL 1.1 for a variety of reasons, not least mixed support from tooling, and some notion of "Best Practice". And yet we're still regularly presented with WSDLs from third parties which make use of soap:header. Given a world where WSDL 2.0 has completely replaced WSDL 1.1 is still a long way off, my concern now is to keep the ability to be able to describe existing services in WSDL 2.0. Realistically that now includes many services with header data targeted at 'applications'. So some obvious means of mapping WSDL 1.1 headers into WSDL 2.0 would be a bonus, even if that were to be buried in each binding. Looking at the spec with this perspective, the AD feature doesn't quite do it (for me). Paul
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 15:56:25 UTC