- From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:52:25 -0800
- To: "'Ramkumar Menon'" <ramkumar.menon@gmail.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <037601c75164$babc71c0$3501a8c0@DELLICIOUS>
Thank you for the comment. The Working Group this issue as a CR152 [1]. While we don't see much utility in defining a Binding Component for an Interface that defines only faults, writing such an assertion is a bit complicated to develop, since it has to handle interfaceless Bindings as well. Because we're trying to finish the spec shortly, adding such an assertion was judged as low value at this point. The WG thus decided to close with no action. Unless you let us know otherwise within 2 weeks, we will assume you agree with the resolution of this issue. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR152 Jonathan Marsh - <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com - <http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com _____ From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ramkumar Menon Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:14 PM To: www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: Assertion on Bindings for Interface that only define faults Hi Gurus, I assume that it does not make sense, and is an error to define a Binding component for an Interface Component that defines only Faults. Does this call for a new assertion ? rgds, Ram -- Shift to the left, shift to the right! Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte! -Ramkumar Menon A typical Macroprocessor
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 00:59:10 UTC