Re: Editorial >> WSDL 2.0 definitions v/s WSDL 2.0 descriptions

Ram,

Agreed, in 2.1.2 we are refering to documents so they should be called 
"descriptions".

Jonathan, let's accept this as editorial. OK?

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



"Ramkumar Menon" <ramkumar.menon@gmail.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
10/11/2006 02:03 PM

To
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Subject
Re: Editorial >> WSDL 2.0 definitions v/s WSDL 2.0 descriptions






Hi Arthur,
 
Thanks a lot for the explanation. You are absolutely right. 
This actually renders the comment against the snippet in section 4.2.1 
invalid. 

Correct me if I am wrong. I assume that the edition is pretty minor then - 
Just the snippet in section 2.1.2 [as I quoted earlier] cd be edited to 
refer to "descriptions" rather than definitions. [since it makes the 
statement that wsdl 2.0 definitions are represented as "description" 
element information items.]. 
 
Regards!
Ram
 
 

 
On 10/11/06, Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote: 

Ram, 

Thx for the comment. The document as a whole is a description, which is 
why the root element is <description>. However, a case could be made for 
regarding each nested element, e.g. <interface>, <binding>, <service>, as 
the definition of a component. So a description is a collection of 
definitions. What do you think? 

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 


"Ramkumar Menon" <ramkumar.menon@gmail.com > 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
10/11/2006 12:25 AM 


To
www-ws-desc@w3.org 
cc

Subject
Editorial >> WSDL 2.0 definitions v/s WSDL 2.0 descriptions









Hi, 
 
I suggest a minor editorial change to the Part 1 [Core Language] regarding 
the usage of  the terms "WSDL 2.0 definitions" and "WSDL 2.0 
descriptions". 
Quoting snippet from Section 2.1.2  [WSDL 2.0 definitions are represented 
in XML by one or more WSDL 2.0 Information Sets (Infosets), that is one or 
more description element information items] 
Quoting snippet from Section 4.2.1 [ Its actual value indicates that the 
containing WSDL 2.0 document MAY contain qualified references to WSDL 2.0 
definitions in that namespace ] 
These could be changed to WSDL 2.0 "descriptions" from "definitions" - 
ensures consistent terminology. 
 
HTH, 
rgds, 
Ram 

-- 
Shift to the left, shift to the right!
Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!

-Ramkumar Menon
A typical Macroprocessor 



-- 
Shift to the left, shift to the right!
Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!

-Ramkumar Menon
A typical Macroprocessor