RE: service references (was: Re: WSA diffs from REST)

> > Better I use tone now then wait around and have the TAG
> mandate a deep
> > rewrite of WSDL later.
>
> :-)
>
> I personally don't take the TAG as controlling authority to
> that extent.
> If they do that, we should spank the TAGsters amongst us for not
> keeping is abreast enough of fundamental flaws that we're just too
> damn dumb to get; where's DaveO?
>
> But that's just me.
>

Je suis ici.  I also don't think of the TAG as that controlling.  I think
that WG's should do what they feel best, given time/functionality/quality
trade-offs.  The TAG can and should nudge WG's.  But the TAG mandating a
deep rewrite of a spec when next to no member companies raised it as an
issue seems unlikely.  I suggest that we drop discussions about what the TAG
would/wouldn't do from this.

Personally, I have much sympathy for Paul's position.  Heck, I even
suggested to Paul last wednesday night that he raise it.  Though I believe I
also suggested a proposed solution would help.  It seems to me like the WSDL
group is taking this issue up with some serious interest.  I've always liked
the idea of passing PortRefs around - though there are some issues around
mapping the non-URI parts (ie parameters) into subsequent run-time messages.
Seems to me that the issue is being looked at.  I think we should take this
off WS-arch and into wsdl.

Cheers,
Dave