Discussion:
Methods Documentation in WSDL
Silvano Girardi Jr
2008-04-24 13:32:28 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?

Thanks,
Caroline Maynard
2008-04-25 08:38:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any volunteers?
Silvano Girardi Jr
2008-04-25 14:02:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any volunteers?
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in my spare
time.

I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are going to
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can put
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how you guys
handle these things).

Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Caroline Maynard
2008-04-25 15:28:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any volunteers?
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in my spare
time.
I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are going to
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can put
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how you guys
handle these things).
Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Silvano
Great :-)
Suggest you raise a Feature/Change Request at
http://pecl.php.net/bugs/report.php?package=SCA_SDO. Then when you have
a proposed patch we can get the relevant committers to review it.
Silvano Girardi Jr
2008-04-25 16:06:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any
volunteers?
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in my
spare
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
time.
I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are going
to
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can put
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how you
guys
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
handle these things).
Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Silvano
Great :-)
Suggest you raise a Feature/Change Request at
http://pecl.php.net/bugs/report.php?package=SCA_SDO. Then when you have
a proposed patch we can get the relevant committers to review it.
Ok I just did it: http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=13775

Need your thoughts here.

1 - should it include the description of the service too (as I put in the
request above), or only for methods?
2 - should it always happen or be optional? If optional, how to handle this?

Silvano

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoa-/***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to phpsoa-unsubscribe-/***@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Silvano Girardi Jr
2008-05-30 16:05:24 UTC
Permalink
Since I got no comments, I made it only for methods and not optional.

I've put the patch in the case.

Silvano
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any
volunteers?
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in my
spare
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
time.
I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are going
to
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can put
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how you
guys
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
handle these things).
Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Silvano
Great :-)
Suggest you raise a Feature/Change Request at
http://pecl.php.net/bugs/report.php?package=SCA_SDO. Then when you have
a proposed patch we can get the relevant committers to review it.
Ok I just did it: http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=13775
Need your thoughts here.
1 - should it include the description of the service too (as I put in the
request above), or only for methods?
2 - should it always happen or be optional? If optional, how to handle this?
Silvano
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoa-/***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to phpsoa-unsubscribe-/***@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Graham Charters
2008-06-02 13:19:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi Silvano,

Sorry for not replying sooner and not replying to your original note.
I always had in mind to generate documentation in the WSDL from the
methods descriptions, so what you have done is exactly the right idea.

Thanks also for the patch. I haven't taken a look at the moment. The
SCA_SDO project has a CLA to cover contributions and so far as I'm
aware you've not signed, or been asked to sign it. Is this something
you'd be willing and able to do? I can give you more information in
needed.

Regards, Graham.
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Since I got no comments, I made it only for methods and not optional.
I've put the patch in the case.
Silvano
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any
volunteers?
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in my
spare
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
time.
I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are going
to
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can put
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how you
guys
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
handle these things).
Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Silvano
Great :-)
Suggest you raise a Feature/Change Request at
http://pecl.php.net/bugs/report.php?package=SCA_SDO. Then when you have
a proposed patch we can get the relevant committers to review it.
Ok I just did it:http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=13775
Need your thoughts here.
1 - should it include the description of the service too (as I put in the
request above), or only for methods?
2 - should it always happen or be optional? If optional, how to handle this?
Silvano
Silvano Girardi Jr
2008-06-02 15:53:12 UTC
Permalink
Hi Graham,
I have that interest. Where do I start? :)

Thanks
Silvano
Post by Graham Charters
Hi Silvano,
Sorry for not replying sooner and not replying to your original note.
I always had in mind to generate documentation in the WSDL from the
methods descriptions, so what you have done is exactly the right idea.
Thanks also for the patch. I haven't taken a look at the moment. The
SCA_SDO project has a CLA to cover contributions and so far as I'm
aware you've not signed, or been asked to sign it. Is this something
you'd be willing and able to do? I can give you more information in
needed.
Regards, Graham.
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Since I got no comments, I made it only for methods and not optional.
I've put the patch in the case.
Silvano
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any
volunteers?
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in
my
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
spare
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
time.
I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are
going
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
to
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can
put
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how
you
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
guys
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
handle these things).
Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Silvano
Great :-)
Suggest you raise a Feature/Change Request at
http://pecl.php.net/bugs/report.php?package=SCA_SDO. Then when you
have
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
a proposed patch we can get the relevant committers to review it.
Ok I just did it:http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=13775
Need your thoughts here.
1 - should it include the description of the service too (as I put in
the
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
request above), or only for methods?
2 - should it always happen or be optional? If optional, how to handle this?
Silvano
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoa-/***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to phpsoa-unsubscribe-/***@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Graham Charters
2008-06-04 19:26:19 UTC
Permalink
Hi Silvano,

There's a text document called "CLA" in the distirbution (see
http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/pecl/sdo/CLA?revision=1.2&view=markup&pathrev=MAIN).
It describes what you need to do. If you have any questions or
concerns, please let me know.

Regards, Graham.
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Hi Graham,
I have that interest. Where do I start? :)
Thanks
Silvano
Post by Graham Charters
Hi Silvano,
Sorry for not replying sooner and not replying to your original note.
I always had in mind to generate documentation in the WSDL from the
methods descriptions, so what you have done is exactly the right idea.
Thanks also for the patch. I haven't taken a look at the moment. The
SCA_SDO project has a CLA to cover contributions and so far as I'm
aware you've not signed, or been asked to sign it. Is this something
you'd be willing and able to do? I can give you more information in
needed.
Regards, Graham.
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Since I got no comments, I made it only for methods and not optional.
I've put the patch in the case.
Silvano
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
is there any special reason for the SCA to do not generate the
<documentation></documentation> in the WSDL based on the method's
description in the doc block?
Probably nobody thought to do it. Seems a good idea to me. Any
volunteers?
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
I was checking how it works and it seems something I can handle in
my
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
spare
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
time.
I will need to be in touch with someone here to discuss how we are
going
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
to
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
do this.
Might be best in private and once we define the ways to do it we can
put
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
here in the list for votes. (Just thoughts really... not sure how
you
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
guys
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
handle these things).
Anyway, I am a volunteer :)
Silvano
Great :-)
Suggest you raise a Feature/Change Request at
http://pecl.php.net/bugs/report.php?package=SCA_SDO. Then when you
have
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
Post by Caroline Maynard
a proposed patch we can get the relevant committers to review it.
Ok I just did it:http://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=13775
Need your thoughts here.
1 - should it include the description of the service too (as I put in
the
Post by Silvano Girardi Jr
request above), or only for methods?
2 - should it always happen or be optional? If optional, how to handle this?
Silvano
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...