W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > December 2005

Minor editorial points to WSDL spec

From: Katy Warr <katy_warr@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:53:46 +0000
To: Tony.Rogers@ca.com, Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM, umit.yalcinalp@sap.com
Cc: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF5462237E.616E5219-ON802570DD.004E95C3-802570DD.005752C4@uk.ibm.com>
Marc, Tony and Umit
I was just looking through the (editors' copy) WSDL spec.  Here are some 
minor points - I think that they are all just syntax?
Many thanks
Katy

EDITORIAL SUGGESTION: Change 'or' to 'and/or'
>> 2. Including WSDL Metadata in EPRs
>> 
>> An EPRs metadata section can contain a reference to WSDL metadata or 
can include embedded WSDL metadata.

This suggests that the metadata section contains EITHER a reference OR the 
embedded metadata.  In fact, as stated in section
2.2, the metadata section can include embeded metadata in conjunction with 
a reference:
 
>> In that case, if the InterfaceName or ServiceName elements are also 
included in the metadata section of the EPR, only the ports with the same 
interface as that 
>> specified are to be considered alternative access channels.

I think that the first section should read:
>> 2. Including WSDL Metadata in EPRs
>> 
>> An EPRs metadata section can contain a reference to WSDL metadata 
***and/***or can include embedded WSDL metadata.

EDITORIAL NIT-PICK :o)
Often "EPRs" is used instead of "EPR's" when not talking plural.  e.g.:
>> Including WSDL Metadata in EPRs
>>
>> An ***EPRs*** metadata section can contain a reference to WSDL metadata 
or can include embedded WSDL metadata.

EDITORIAL SUGGESTION:
Section 2.1
Do we need to specify cardinality for InterfaceName, ServiceName and 
EndpointName - i.e. to ensure that there are never multiple ones 
specified?
Section 2.2
As above but with embedded WSDL definitions - do we need to specify max 1?

EDITORIAL SUGGESTION:
New document, (with Anonymous Element):
>> Section 3.2 Anonymous Element
>>      :
>> -   ?optional?: This value indicates that a response endpoint EPR in a 
request message MAY contain an anonymous URI as an address.
Could we add "This defines the default behavior."? Although it is implied 
from the previous section, this might help people reading who aren't 
familiar with the 
text.
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 15:54:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:10 GMT