W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws@w3.org > February 2004

Basic Profile

From: Joshua Boverhof <JRBoverhof@lbl.gov>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:33:08 -0800
Message-ID: <40242434.1090402@lbl.gov>
To: www-ws@w3.org

An effort called BP-1.0 has come to my attention, and they are proposing to
handle WSDL-1.1 rpc/literal messages like so:


R2735 A MESSAGE described with an rpc-literal binding MUST place the 
*part accessor elements for parameters and return value in no namespace*.

R2737 A MESSAGE described with an rpc-literal binding MUST namespace 
qualify the children of part accessor elements for the parameters and 
the return value with the targetNamespace in which their types are defined.

Is this in conformance with WSDL-1.1, or the intent?  I think of the 
part as just providing a
name to the type, and thus I assumed the namespace would be that of the 

Received on Friday, 6 February 2004 18:33:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:05:14 UTC