RE: {rpc signature} REQUIRED when rpc style is not specified?

FWIIW, sounds reasonable to me. 
 
--umit
 


________________________________

	From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
	Sent: Monday, Jul 17, 2006 7:08 PM
	To: Jonathan Marsh
	Cc: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org; www-ws-desc@w3.org;
www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
	Subject: Re: {rpc signature} REQUIRED when rpc style is not
specified?
	
	

	+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_Sign
ature_Definition
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts
.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#InterfaceOperation_RPC_Sig
nature_Definition>  
	  
	  

	 [  Jonathan Marsh  ][  jmarsh@microsoft.com
<mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com>   ][  http://auburnmarshes.spaces.msn.com
<http://auburnmarshes.spaces.msn.com/>   ]

	  
	

Received on Wednesday, 19 July 2006 19:47:36 UTC