- From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:11:05 -0400
- To: Lawrence Mandel <lmandel@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF559334BA.7219B9E0-ON8525717D.005E42C4-8525717D.005E6C8B@ca.ibm.com>
Lawrence, Thx. I've assigned these to myself and will diagnose the cause. 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 Lawrence Mandel/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 05/26/2006 03:59 PM To www-ws-desc@w3.org cc Subject RE: Interchange result update. I've opened the following Woden Jira reports for the problems Jonathan reported in his post below. 2) http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WODEN-16 3) http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WODEN-17 4) http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WODEN-18 Lawrence Mandel Software Developer IBM Rational Software Phone: 905 - 413 - 3814 Fax: 905 - 413 - 4920 lmandel@ca.ibm.com "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> 05/25/2006 09:42 AM To Lawrence Mandel/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA cc Subject RE: Interchange result update. Not really ;-) But I?d appreciate it if you would! From: Lawrence Mandel [mailto:lmandel@ca.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:42 PM To: Jonathan Marsh Subject: Re: Interchange result update. Hi Jonathan, Thanks for the summary. It's good to see others testing Woden and providing feedback. Care to open Jira reports [1] for these problems? [1] http://incubator.apache.org/woden/issue_tracking.html Lawrence Mandel "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 05/24/2006 03:31 PM To <www-ws-desc@w3.org> cc Subject Interchange result update. I checked in a new version with the new Woden results, my stylesheet updated to support the soap binding extensions and the safety extension. (doesn?t yet do the rpc extension). Naturally, when there was a question I chose my implementation as the baseline ;-). Woden results appear to me to suffer from several problems: 1) {safety} property is often missing. I sent an issue on whether this is a valid interpretation of the spec. 2) When message content model is #none, Woden emits an invalid <elementDeclaration ref=?id-null?/> reference. 3) When a binding doesn?t specify an interface, Wodwn emits an invalid <interface ref=?id-null?/> reference. 4) Woden often omits {soap underlying protocol}, though this is a REQUIRED property in the spec. 5) Some element declaration components still appear to be missing. [ Jonathan Marsh ][ jmarsh@microsoft.com ][ http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes ]
Received on Monday, 29 May 2006 17:11:12 UTC