- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:17:42 -0400
- To: "'public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org'" <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
ref:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-wsdl20-20040803/#Property_composition_model
Does our property composition model capture all possible cases? I am not
sure. Here is a sample edge case,
<interface name="Bank">
<!-- capable of accepting Kerberos v5 token -->
<property uri="http://example.com/secure-channel#tokenType">
<value>wsse:Kerberosv5TGT</value>
</property>
..
</interface>
<interface name="OpenBank" extends="Bank">
<!-- capable of accepting x509 certificate -->
<property uri="http://example.com/secure-channel#tokenType">
<value>wsse:X509v3</value>
</property>
..
</interface>
According to Interface Component,
"The set of Property components corresponding to the property element
information items in [children], if any, plus the set of Property components
in the {properties} property of the Interface components in {extended
interfaces}, if any."
According to our equivalence rules, property declared in Bank interface is
not equivalent to the property declared in Open Bank interface. Because, the
value of {value} property is different. If these two property components are
present in interface component.{properties}, what is the net effect? This
will be further complicated if I use {value constraint}. Do we have a notion
of type equivalence (for {value constraint})? Please revisit our property
composition model and flush out all such edge cases.
Also, shall we provide a special rule for computing the equivalence of
property components?
Regards,
Asir S Vedamuthu
asirv at webmethods dot com
http://www.webmethods.com/
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 11:17:45 UTC