+1
Cheers,
dieter
"Satish Thatte"
<satisht@microsof
t.com> To
"Assaf Arkin" <>,
03/12/2004 05:14 "Alex Yiu" <>
AM cc
"wsbpeltc"
<>,
<>
Subject
RE: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea!
I am having trouble keeping up with this fast moving discussion. I am
hoping that you will reach an agreement and then educate the mere
mortals among us on what the consensus proposal is ..
Satish
-----Original Message-----
From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:59 PM
To: Alex Yiu
Cc: wsbpeltc; Satish Thatte;
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea!
> (4)
> Assaf suggested:
> In WSDL 2.0,
> $variable/ns:element[/ns:subElement]
> In WSDL 1.1,
> $variable/partName/ns:element
>
> I was wondering whether it make sense to add a WSDL QNAME
> (ns:wsdlMsgName) like the following for WSDL 1.1:
>
> $variable/ns:wsdlMsgName/partName/...
>
> then the syntax would be more symmetrically between WSDL 1.1 and 2.0
> ns:wsdlMsgName => ns:element
> partname => subElement
>
> The BPEL code migration may be easier from WSDL 1.1 to 2.0
If anyone has a good handle on where WSDL 2.0 is heading with their
message definition, would be great to throw some ideas around. Ideally
if you have a WSDL 2.0 interface that's backward compatible with WSDL
1.1, you could use the BPEL process with both 1.1 and 2.0 without
change.
Assaf
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php
.
