Re: [soapbuilders] addition to WSDL spec?
- I'd say extensions are meaningless, it should have a documented mime
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 02:45:55 -0500, in soap you wrote:
>i'd like to suggest that the WSDL specification is
>updated to state that all files that contain WSDL
>should end with a ".wsdl" extension.
>right now, there is no consistency in the community
>- some people use .xml, some use ?wsdl, etc. etc.
>other standard formats seem to have a standard extension,
>and i don't think that WSDL should be an exception.
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Cool - thanks :)
>done. URL is up:kQuoteService.wsdl
>That makes sense to me.
>1. what should be content type? I'm using text/xml now.
>2. What should I do with namespace attribute on importAs this is a hint, it should be safe to ignore
>element? I'm ignoring it right now.
>Would be great if someone will test it and let me know. Thank you.Henrik