%objectMethodMessagesAndDataTyping; todo: the hytime arch form todo: what's the diff between extended link and extended group link? XLinked and HyTime what about interfaceName and what about it mapping to its PUBLIC ID comment that need methodID b/ the OMMess can say: (in MIDL is the returnval a unique attrib?) note that parameterDef is "scoped to a methodDef i.e no method would ever have knowledge of an other methods param (except reflection?) Otherwise don't make no sence. So even though CORBA paramterDefs are independent objects from methodDefs, that is not the case here b/ want to have minimal roundtrips over the Web. the methodsig name cannot be an ID b/ of polymorphism. Address polymorphism Note: could have gone with parameters which has parameterDefs and throws which has exceptionRefs went with methodsign and not methodDef why? implies name, return and params note that the 'name' attribute is not an ID so it is not required to be unique within an interfaceDef document. This allows for polymorphic methods. Two methods with the same name can be distinguished by their IDs. what about this better b/ CDATA is freer than xml names, stupid Fuck. I need to be able to say same as dt:dt so why this? Ugly too. Nothe taht dt:dt is really a message to the XML 1.0 processor's application which in this case includes teh DataTyper which ias previously mentioned is not part of the MXL 1.0 prossore. In general, whould be mroe power to the XML1.0 if dt:dt were defined to a na attibute of type ENTITY or were "enumerated to be a parmaterEntREf (or just enumerated attrib as is) Now how do I say struct? sounds like a ENITY attrib on the mehodDef would need entityRefs for all the primative. see "wishfull thinking" what else is going on in the CORBA paramDef