Re: Update and issues: ACTION: LeeF to draft WSDL 1.1 for SPARQL thingy with AndyS and Elias

On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 02:26:43AM -0400, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:

> So, we can't legally both allow for multiple (default or named) graphs, 
> and also allow for the elements to be in an arbitrary order. So I suspect 
> that we should change this from an xs:all to an xs:sequence.

I originally had this as a seq, but someone in the WG pointed out that
there's no semantics of ordering here (and there isn't, really), so I
changed it to an all. Oh well, I guess it's gonna be changed back. :>

(I wonder if I should include a note in the spec or the schema to the effect
that these aren't *really* ordered...?)

> 2. Importing XML Schema
> 
> So, I don't have a good solution here, and I don't think Kendall does 
> either. 

No, I don't. I don't believe there is a good solution to get around the
mismatch between schema and RDF. I wonder, though, if there's a solution in
the direction of the WSDL 2.0 alternative schema languages note? That won't
help re: WSDL 1.1, though.

Cheers, 
Kendall
--
Sad songs and waltzes aren't selling this year... --Cake