+1
Arthur Ryman,
IBM Software Group, Rational Division
blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@fido.ca
"Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
07/12/2006 02:26 PM
To
<public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
cc
<www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Subject
{rpc signature} REQUIRED when rpc style is not specified?
AIUI, this fulfills AIs assigned variously to me and John Kaputin.
Section 4.1.1 of the Adjuncts specifies {rpc signature} as a required
property. Per our recent clarifications, this will appear in the
component model whenever the implementation supports the rpc extension.
Thus, even if the {style} property does not include the rpc-style uri, the
{rpc signature} property will appear. No default value is supplied
either.
Instead, I believe it would be cleaner to make the {rpc property}
optional, and state that when the rpc style is engaged, the property MUST
appear.
[1]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#InterfaceOperation_RPC_Signature_Definition
[ Jonathan Marsh ][ jmarsh@microsoft.com ][
http://auburnmarshes.spaces.msn.com ]
Received on Tuesday, 18 July 2006 02:08:28 UTC