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

RE: LC101/LC104 - proposed text

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 12:24:32 -0700
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A5083F039D@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

+1 except -1 for bloating the pseudo-schema.

Nowhere else in this spec, or in the WSDL 2.0 spec, are extension points
called out in the pseudo-schema.  I believe this was intentional, as the
purpose of the pseudo-schema is to provide quick reference to the
required constructs.  Enumeration of the extensibility points is
adequately documented in the prose and in the real schema, and I think
that's sufficient.  In fact, the pseudo-schema notation doesn't even
support wildcards and we'd have to augment it to provide them.

I don't think leaving the pseudo-schema alone weakens your fine proposal
at all.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Glen Daniels
> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 8:52 AM
> To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: LC101/LC104 - proposed text
> Hi folks:
> Here's an amended proposal for LC101/104.  Replace first sentence in
> section 2.1 with:
> ---
> An endpoint reference is a collection of abstract properties.  This
> specification defines a core set of properties, but it is also
> for other specifications to extend these with other properties.  The
> semantics and XML Infoset representation (see next section) for any
> extension properties will be described in their defining
> The core properties are as follows:
> ---
> With regard to the XML infoset section, I notice that we're missing
> pseudo-schema for the {any} element and the @{any} attribute - I think
> we should add that.  Then, after the last
> "/wsa:EndpointReference/@{any}" definition and before the example, we
> should add:
> ---
> NOTE: Specifications which describe any extension elements or
> used to augment the above model will explain any effects those
> extensions may have on the abstract properties.  They may affect
> the core properties or extension properties as defined in section 2.1.
> ---
> I think this gets across what we discussed on Monday.
> Thanks,
> --Glen
Received on Friday, 15 July 2005 19:30:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:10 UTC