[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Rethinking namespaces,attribute remapping (was Re:[xml-dev

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Rethinking namespaces,attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 00:26:13 -0400
• References: <3A967FE7B99E134C9FE65E2C13656030FAAB0D@l...>

[CHIUSANO, Joseph]
[[
<Excerpt>
Is that not the case?  Does the end user need the WSDL
file at runtime as well?
</Excerpt>

Yes.  This allows changes to be made to an existing WSDL description which
the clients can understand at runtime, thereby allowing for dynamic
upgrades.
]]

This is just the kind of uncontrolled madness that led to DLL Hell.  Once
finalized, I suggest that a given Web Service specification should remain
unchanged, like an RFC, as befits a contract (the name its proponents so
often give it).  If changes in the signature or behavior should become
necessary, then change the name and maintain the older version until most
users have migrated to the new ones.   Anything else is in responsible.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Rethinking namespaces,attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• References:
  • RE: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
    • From: "CHIUSANO, Joseph" <JCHIUSANO@l...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Rethinking namespaces,attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Next by Date: Re: limits of the generic
• Previous by thread: RE: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Next by thread: Re: Rethinking namespaces,attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread