- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:08:19 -0500
- To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
[On behalf of the XML Schema WG] WSDL Part 1 says: "The WSDL include element information item is modeled after the XML Schema include element information item (see [XML Schema: Structures], section 4.2.3 "References to schema components in the same namespace"). " ...and... "Specifically, it can be used to include components from WSDL descriptions that share a target namespace with the including description. Components in directly included descriptions become part of the component model of the including description. Directly included means that component inclusion is not transitive; components included by one of the included documents are not available to the original including document unless the are included directly by that document. " - http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-wsdl20-20040803/#includes We have some comments based on our general experience with composition matters. These two WSDL statements are to some extent contradictory. In fact, XML schema inclusions are effectively transitive. The XML schema model is that a single schema (I.e. set of components) is composed from the transitive closure of the included documents (as well as, in our case, redefined documents, documents obtained through schemaLocation hints on an import or in the instance, supplied on a command line, etc.) QName references are uniformly resolved within this combined schema, regardless of the source of the definition or the identity of the file containing a QName reference. It would be nice if WSDL composition worked like XML Schema composition. If you decide to keep it as it is, we would like to make clear that WSDL mechanism is indeed different than XML Schema, and suggest that any comparisons you draw between the two be a bit clearer and more accurate. Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu asirv at webmethods dot com http://www.webmethods.com/
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2004 20:08:22 UTC