Re: Which WSDL specification should I support?

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 00120CED85257447_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Erica,

Your analysis sounds correct if you want to work with .NET.

Arthur Ryman, Technical Executive (IBM DE)
Project and Program Management, Rational Division

phone:      +1-905-413-3077, TL 313-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-3831, TL 313-3831
fax:            +1-905-413-4920, TL 313-4920
mobile:     +1-416-939-5063



ear <[email protected]> 
Sent by: [email protected]
05/09/2008 08:03 PM

To
[email protected]
cc

Subject
Which WSDL specification should I support?







Hello,

I am thinking about writing a WSDL stub generator for J2ME applications. 
It
is desired to have interopt with .NET as well as Apache and other Web/App
servers. Microsoft .NET supports WSDL 1.0/1.1 specification but not WSDL 
2.0
specification. So, Question is which WSDL 1.0/1.1/2.0 specifications to
support to maximize tools usefulness? My thinking is that maybe I should
support only 1.1 and latter enhance tool to support 2.0 as it becomes 
widely
inuse. What do you guys think?

Thanks,


-----
[email protected] Erica A Ramsey 
http://www.nabble.com/file/u835230/MobileBizCard.png 
http://home.comcast.net/~erica.ramsey/CV CV 
http://docs.google.com/Presentation?id=d83hthz_4fhvn5cct Screenshots a
couple of J2ME Projects 
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Which-WSDL-specification-should-I-support--tp17158418p17158418.html

Sent from the w3.org - www-ws-desc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.





--=_alternative 00120CED85257447_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"


<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Erica,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Your analysis sounds correct if you
want to work with .NET.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Arthur Ryman, Technical Executive (IBM
DE)<br>
Project and Program Management, Rational Division<br>
<br>
phone: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;+1-905-413-3077, TL 313-3077<br>
assistant: +1-905-413-3831, TL 313-3831<br>
fax: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;+1-905-413-4920, TL 313-4920<br>
mobile: &nbsp; &nbsp; +1-416-939-5063</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>ear &lt;[email protected]&gt;</b>
</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: [email protected]</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">05/09/2008 08:03 PM</font>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">[email protected]</font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Which WSDL specification should I support?</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2><br>
Hello,<br>
<br>
I am thinking about writing a WSDL stub generator for J2ME applications.
It<br>
is desired to have interopt with .NET as well as Apache and other Web/App<br>
servers. Microsoft .NET supports WSDL 1.0/1.1 specification but not WSDL
2.0<br>
specification. So, Question is which WSDL 1.0/1.1/2.0 specifications to<br>
support to maximize tools usefulness? My thinking is that maybe I should<br>
support only 1.1 and latter enhance tool to support 2.0 as it becomes widely<br>
inuse. What do you guys think?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
<br>
-----<br>
[email protected] Erica A Ramsey <br>
http://www.nabble.com/file/u835230/MobileBizCard.png <br>
http://home.comcast.net/~erica.ramsey/CV CV <br>
http://docs.google.com/Presentation?id=d83hthz_4fhvn5cct Screenshots a<br>
couple of J2ME Projects <br>
-- <br>
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Which-WSDL-specification-should-I-support--tp17158418p17158418.html<br>
Sent from the w3.org - www-ws-desc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
--=_alternative 00120CED85257447_=--