You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to soap-dev@ws.apache.org by Gegi Thomas/Raleigh/IBM <ge...@us.ibm.com> on 2000/10/23 19:34:40 UTC
Deployment Descriptor Schema
Hi Folks,
Is anyone aware of the existance of a schema document for the Deployment
Descriptor used in the SOAP implementation?
I have been examining the Deployment Descriptor files included in the
samples; however, if there is a schema available, I'd like to look at it.
Thanks,
Gegi Thomas
Re: Deployment Descriptor Schema
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
There was a DTD for it in the IBM-SOAP days, but we never got around
to updating and commiting it. I have attached it to this note - if
someone would like to schemafy it it'll be good to commit it.
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gegi Thomas/Raleigh/IBM" <ge...@us.ibm.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 1:34 PM
Subject: Deployment Descriptor Schema
> Hi Folks,
>
> Is anyone aware of the existance of a schema document for the Deployment
> Descriptor used in the SOAP implementation?
> I have been examining the Deployment Descriptor files included in the
> samples; however, if there is a schema available, I'd like to look at it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gegi Thomas
>
Re: Deployment Descriptor Schema
Posted by Sanjiva Weerawarana <sa...@watson.ibm.com>.
There was a DTD for it in the IBM-SOAP days, but we never got around
to updating and commiting it. I have attached it to this note - if
someone would like to schemafy it it'll be good to commit it.
Sanjiva.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gegi Thomas/Raleigh/IBM" <ge...@us.ibm.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 1:34 PM
Subject: Deployment Descriptor Schema
> Hi Folks,
>
> Is anyone aware of the existance of a schema document for the Deployment
> Descriptor used in the SOAP implementation?
> I have been examining the Deployment Descriptor files included in the
> samples; however, if there is a schema available, I'd like to look at it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gegi Thomas
>