+1... I feel like it's a must to have.
I prefer a String, unless we are going to do any kind of processing with the description.
~Thilina
~Thilina
On 1/24/06, Ajith Ranabahu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 for the proposal
But do we need to allow "Any XML junk" ? I mean string would be fine for a description rather than XML--
On 1/24/06, Ruchith Fernando < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:+1 to the description element
Thanks,
Ruchith
On 1/24/06, Chamikara Jayalath < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1. Thats a nice feature.
>
> Chamikara
>
>
> On 1/23/06, Deepal Jayasinghe < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all;
> >
> > Module author should be able to tell small description about his module
> implementation and currently we are not support that. As an example module
> author should be able to tell about the spec that the module has implemented
> and its version and etc.. , So I like to have decryption element in
> module.xml (same as service decryption in services.xml ) , when it come to
> module versioning having decryptions is very useful.
> >
> > <description>
> > Any XML junk or just string can go here
> > </description>
> >
> > comments .....
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Deepal
> >
> ................................................................
> > ~Future is Open~
> >
>
>
Ajith Ranabahu
--
"May the SourcE be with u"
http://webservices.apache.org/~thilina/
http://thilinag.blogspot.com/ http://www.bloglines.com/blog/Thilina
