www-ws-desc@w3.org from February 2005 by author

Amelia A Lewis

Re: Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Monday, 7 February)
Re: SOAP Header Blocks in WSDL (was RE: First Class Headers - Pr oposed Resolution for LC76d (Wednesday, 2 February)

Arthur Ryman

Proposed Change for Interface Component {features} and {properties} (Thursday, 24 February)
Re: Test Suite Update (Friday, 18 February)
Re: Test Suite Update (Friday, 18 February)
Re: schemaLocation background (Friday, 18 February)
Regrets for Telecon 2005-02-15 (Thursday, 17 February)
Re: WSDL Media type registration (Thursday, 10 February)
RE: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model (Wednesday, 9 February)
RE: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model (Monday, 7 February)
Re: Test Suite Update (Monday, 7 February)
Test Suite Update (Thursday, 3 February)
Re: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model (Tuesday, 1 February)
Re: Action item on changing processor conformance to document conformance (Tuesday, 1 February)

Asir Vedamuthu

WSDL Action Item: Review LC75s Table (Monday, 28 February)
RE: First Class Header Proposals (Thursday, 17 February)
RE: Consistency of WSDL Component property names (Friday, 11 February)
RE: LC84b: Proposal for generic action property (Friday, 11 February)
RE: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model (Tuesday, 8 February)
RE: Proposal for Simplifications to the Component Model (Monday, 7 February)
RE: Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Monday, 7 February)
First Class Header Proposals (Monday, 7 February)
RE: Summary: AD Feature Related Issues (Monday, 7 February)
RE: Summary: AD Feature Related Issues (Thursday, 3 February)
Summary: AD Feature Related Issues (Thursday, 3 February)
RE: SOAP Header Blocks in WSDL (was RE: First Class Headers - Pr oposed Resolution for LC76d (Thursday, 3 February)
Re: SOAP Header Blocks in WSDL (was RE: First Class Headers - Pr oposed Resolution for LC76d (Wednesday, 2 February)

Bijan Parsia

[OT] Call for participation in an experiment (Tuesday, 15 February)

David Booth

WSDL Media type registration (Friday, 4 February)
Re: Proposed media type registration: application/wsdl+xml (Friday, 4 February)
Action item on optional extensions (Wednesday, 2 February)
WSDL 2.0 Primer - remaining work (Wednesday, 2 February)

Hugo Haas

Re: First Class Header Proposals (Thursday, 17 February)
Re: First Class Headers - Proposed Resolution for LC76d (Thursday, 17 February)
Re: LC84b: Proposal for generic action property (Thursday, 17 February)
LC84b: Proposal for generic action property (Thursday, 10 February)

Ian Hickson

Re: Action 2005-01-13 Resolution of Issue 271 (Thursday, 24 February)

John Kaputin

Consistency of WSDL Component property names (Tuesday, 8 February)
Consistency of WSDL Component property names (Wednesday, 9 February)

Jonathan Marsh

Agenda, 3-4 March 2005 WS Desc FTF, Boston (Friday, 25 February)
RE: Minutes, 24 February 2005 WS Description telcon (Thursday, 24 February)
Minutes, 24 February 2005 WS Description telcon (Thursday, 24 February)
Agenda, 24 February 2004 WS Desc telcon (Wednesday, 23 February)
WBS straw poll on Appendix E disposition (closes Wed midnight) (Thursday, 17 February)
RE: Minutes, 17 February 2005 WS Description WG telcon (Thursday, 17 February)
Minutes, 17 February 2005 WS Description WG telcon (Thursday, 17 February)
schemaLocation background (Thursday, 17 February)
Agenda, 17 February 2004 WS Desc telcon (Tuesday, 15 February)
Minutes, 10 February 2005 WS Description telcon (Monday, 14 February)
Agenda, 10 February 2004 WS Desc telcon (Wednesday, 9 February)
RE: Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Wednesday, 9 February)
RE: Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Wednesday, 9 February)
FW: i017b: Action and ONM (Monday, 7 February)
Minutes, 3 February 2005 WS Description telcon (Thursday, 3 February)
Agenda, 3 February 2004 WS Desc telcon (Wednesday, 2 February)
RE: apparent bug on the operation name mapping requirement text (Wednesday, 2 February)

Larry Masinter

RE: Action 2005-01-13 Resolution of Issue 270 (Thursday, 24 February)

Lawrence Mandel

Re: Test Suite Update (Friday, 18 February)
Test Suite Update (Wednesday, 16 February)
Re: Test Suite Update (Saturday, 5 February)

Liu, Kevin

RE: Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Monday, 7 February)
Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Monday, 7 February)

paul.downey@bt.com

RE: First Class Headers - Proposed Resolution for LC76d (Thursday, 17 February)
RE: SOAP Header Blocks in WSDL (was RE: First Class Headers - Pr oposed Resolution for LC76d (Thursday, 3 February)

Richard Hopkins

Proposal for LC73/LC75n (multiple interfaces for a service) (Monday, 31 January)

Sanjiva Weerawarana

rationale for rejecting LC75a (Monday, 28 February)

Savas Parastatidis

SSDL: SOAP Service Description Language (Tuesday, 15 February)

Tom Jordahl

RE: i017b: Action and ONM (Friday, 11 February)
RE: LC84b: Proposal for generic action property (Friday, 11 February)

Tom_Antony@i2.com

On the typing of message parts in WSDL (Tuesday, 22 February)

Tony Fletcher

RE: Choice of response message in WSDL (Wednesday, 23 February)

Yalcinalp, Umit

Action 2005-01-13 Resolution of Issue 271 (Thursday, 24 February)
Action 2005-01-13 Resolution of Issue 270 (Thursday, 24 February)
RE: Initial thoughts on WSDL2.0 LC101 - do we need message level binding properties? (Wednesday, 9 February)

youenn fablet

Follow up on versioning and ADD feature (Wednesday, 16 February)

Last message date: Monday, 28 February 2005 17:17:21 UTC