- 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