No
At 05:40 PM 11/15/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>Dear WSRP and WSIA TC Members,
>
>I put up the following issue for an e-mail vote (ending 1 week after this
>notice goes out) - the following summarizes the discussion for this issue
>(thanks Rich !)
>
>Issue #59 (refined) - Keep the wsdlURL field in ServiceDescription?
>
>Arguments in favor:
> - If this was an infrastructural portType (has that flavor), this would be
>THE required field.
> - This provides a standardized place to produce a dynamic WSDL that
>reflects the Consumer's registration.
>
>Arguments against:
> - Since we are above the infrastructural level, this information has to be
>already known in order to invoke getServiceDescription().
> - If the infrastructural level provides such information in the future, it
>will be redundant and likely incompatible
> - Not critical for v1.0 ... can be an extension for those wishing to
>provide the dynamic WSDL concept.
> - Assumes the signature will not change for future versions of the spec.
> - Belongs as part of the discovery process rather than as part of the
>service.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Thomas
>
>Thomas Schaeck
>Chairman OASIS WSRP TC
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>.
Steven Smith
Director of Information Services and Technology
Capitol College
