- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:45:59 -0500
- To: "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Action Item: 2005-03-03: Asir to double check the > subissues of 76d to see if they should be > raised as issues and to do so. Summary: a, d and e are subsumed by LC76d resolution. b is purely editorial. I request Roberto to review c. Sub issue a: mandatory mustUnderstand [1] - is about ad:mustUnderstand. This issue is subsumed by LC76d resolution. Sub issue b: MUST if possible (Editorial?) [1] - is about the phrase "element information item that MUST be turned into an HTTP header if possible", where MUST and "if possible" are used together. This is purely editorial. I request Part 2 editors to take this into account for LC76d implementation. Sub issue c: Use Schema for versioning, not SOAP headers [1] - I do not understand this one. I request Roberto to review and raise an issue, if it should be. Sub issue d: Wrapper type can't be validated [1] - is related to using complex types. LC76d resolution does not use complex types. This issue is subsumed by LC76d resolution. Sub issue e: mismatched feature/modules [2] - is about AD feature. This issue is subsumed by LC76d resolution. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0009.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Feb/0018.html Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu asirv at webmethods dot com http://www.webmethods.com/
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2005 15:46:05 UTC