W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > May 2006

RE: Interchange result update.

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>

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


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

"Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> 
05/25/2006 09:42 AM 

Lawrence Mandel/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA 

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 

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:58 UTC