[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] RE: Issue - 77 - Motion to require access to values not defined in portType
Ugo Wrote: (By the way, in principle some risk exists even in the case of abstract messages associated with abstract operations. There is nothing in WSDL 1.1 that prevents actual bindings from leaving some message parts out when it comes to concrete message - so BPEL would have uninitialized parts in that case too). Satish: Well in that case I suggest BP 1.1 should forbid this behavior ;-) -----Original Message----- From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 9:59 AM To: Satish Thatte; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [wsbpel] RE: Issue - 77 - Motion to require access to values not defined in portType Satish, you say: > the other abstract components you speak of are bound to the abstract interfaces > through the even more complex area of binding. Sorry, I disagree on the way you put this. These abstract components ARE part of the WSDL abstract interface.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]