- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:52:25 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- cc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, Herve Ruellan <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
Jean-Jacques,
I believe this would not *add* any dependency because we already
need some external source to tell us what the method signature
actually is - we need the actual names of the parameters and of
the very method that we're calling. Knowing whether there is a
return value is in the same bag of information.
Best regards,
Jacek Kopecky
Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
http://www.systinet.com/
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
> Wouldn't this add a dependency on WSDL? I don't think we should go there.
>
> Jean-Jacques.
>
> Jacek Kopecky wrote:
>
> > <snip/> Therefore, if
> > the first member is meant to be the return value (and we know
> > that from the signature), <snip/>
>
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2002 06:52:28 UTC