Subject: Re: [ws-sx] i017 sp:RequiredElements mechanism
One thing we may want to look at is that the use of the term "Elements" in this assertion is inconsistent with the use of "Elements" vs. "Parts" throughout the rest of the specification. Elsewhere "Parts" refers to soap:Body and children of soap:Header and "Elements" refers to arbitrary elements. In this case we are using "Elements" to refer to soap:Body and children of soap:Header. Michael McIntosh/Watson/IBM@IBMUS wrote on 02/07/2006 03:59:12 PM: > Description > > The spRequiredElements mechanism allows the policy to state whether a > header element is required. This seems to provide an alternative to > specifying required headers in WSDL/Schema. I had originally thoughth that > this would be useful for other (non-header) elements. After thinking about > it for a while I now think that WSDL/Schema validation should be used for > that when needed. > > Proposal > > Drop the issue.