Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [soapbuilders] how many schema versions do we need?

Expand Messages
  • Dave Winer
    Fredrik that s one of many reasons we did the BDG. I m curious if you plan to work with us on that? That s a serious question -- I asked Microsoft for their
    Message 1 of 5 , Mar 30, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Fredrik that's one of many reasons we did the BDG. I'm curious if you plan
      to work with us on that? That's a serious question -- I asked Microsoft for
      their support, I am now asking for your support. Our customers and
      shareholders have been very very patient with us while we took this
      excursion into interop-land. If you'd like to propose an alternative to BDG,
      please do, but do it soon, we want to get on with delivering results from
      this process.

      Now I'll quote Claude Bullard [1]: "Thou shalt not deploy anything that has
      not been deployed before you deploy except if said deployment shall slow the
      deployment of the fastest among you."

      Dave

      [1] http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200103/msg01013.html


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik@...>
      To: "soapbuilders" <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 1:37 AM
      Subject: [soapbuilders] how many schema versions do we need?


      > to make life a bit easier for non-WSDL clients, how about limiting
      > the number of Schema versions used by SOAP implementations?
      >
      > from what I can tell, the ILAB servers uses the following
      >
      > http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema (as per the current 1.1 spec)
      > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema (microsoft .net)
      > http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema (most recent schema)
      >
      > I can live with two versions (soap 1.1 and latest), but having to
      > support every intermediate schema version is starting to get on
      > my nerves...
      >
      > as far as I can tell, the .NET stack is the only one using the 2000/10
      > edition. can this be fixed? my life would be so much easier ;-)
      >
      > Cheers /F
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
    • keithba@microsoft.com
      I agree with you. The latest Schema draft (2001), is what we have moved to in .NET land. ... 2000/10
      Message 2 of 5 , Mar 30, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree with you. The latest Schema draft (2001), is what we have
        moved to in .NET land.

        --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik@p...> wrote:
        > to make life a bit easier for non-WSDL clients, how about limiting
        > the number of Schema versions used by SOAP implementations?
        >
        > from what I can tell, the ILAB servers uses the following
        >
        > http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema (as per the current 1.1 spec)
        > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema (microsoft .net)
        > http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema (most recent schema)
        >
        > I can live with two versions (soap 1.1 and latest), but having to
        > support every intermediate schema version is starting to get on
        > my nerves...
        >
        > as far as I can tell, the .NET stack is the only one using the
        2000/10
        > edition. can this be fixed? my life would be so much easier ;-)
        >
        > Cheers /F
      • Mike Deem
        For what it is work, MSTK2 is flexible on this. We are entirely WSDL driven in both the client an service. On the wire, we use the same schema version as is
        Message 3 of 5 , Mar 30, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          For what it is work, MSTK2 is flexible on this. We are entirely WSDL
          driven in both the client an service. On the wire, we use the same
          schema version as is specified in the WSDL. We also distinguish between
          1999/2000 and 2001 when it comes to data type names.

          I can put up 1999 versions of our client and service if this is an
          issue.

          == Mike ==

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Fredrik Lundh [mailto:fredrik@...]
          Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 1:37 AM
          To: soapbuilders
          Subject: [soapbuilders] how many schema versions do we need?


          to make life a bit easier for non-WSDL clients, how about limiting
          the number of Schema versions used by SOAP implementations?

          from what I can tell, the ILAB servers uses the following

          http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema (as per the current 1.1 spec)
          http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema (microsoft .net)
          http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema (most recent schema)

          I can live with two versions (soap 1.1 and latest), but having to
          support every intermediate schema version is starting to get on
          my nerves...

          as far as I can tell, the .NET stack is the only one using the 2000/10
          edition. can this be fixed? my life would be so much easier ;-)

          Cheers /F




          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.