W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > September 2004

FW: Clarification for use of xs:include

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:58:35 -0700
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A50520929F@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
For the record, the WG agreed [1] to add "appropriate value, such as
fragment identifiers (see Schema 4.3.1)," and a similar statement to
section 3.1.1 about importing schema.  We will assume you agree that we
have addressed the issue appropriately unless we hear from you before
Oct 13th.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC41





From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Liu, Kevin
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 3:10 PM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Cc: David Booth (dbooth@w3.org)
Subject: Clarification for use of xs:include


part 1 section 3.1.2 states:

"Inside an embedded XML schema, the xs:import and xs:include element
information items MAY be used to refer to other XML schemas embedded in
the same WSDL description, provided that an appropriate value is
specified for their schemaLocation attribute information items. The
semantics of such element information items are governed solely by the
XML Schema specification [XML Schema: Structures
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-wsdl20-20040803/#XMLSchemaP1> ]." It
doesn't say anything about what's the "appropriate value" and implies
that it's the question for schema spec. 


I searched our mail archival, there were many messages exchanged about
this but seems no conclusion was drawn about what the "appropriate
value" should be for @schemalocations in the following example?  



    <xs:schema targetNamespace = "a"> ....</schema>


    <xs:schema targetNamespace = "b">

        <xs:import namespace = "a" schemalocation = "???"/> ...



    <xs:schema targetNamespace = "a"> 

        <xs:include  schemalocation = "???"/> ...





Some suggested that for the xs:import in "b", the @schemalocation should
not present (it's optional anyway).  But nothing has been said about the
case for the second "a" which xs:includes the first "a". is it legal
(the spec quoted above implies yes)? if so, what's the right value for
xs:include@schemaLocation(not it's a required attribute ) ?  


Any one can help? Since this a confusing area, I am thinking to include
something in the Primer.

Best Regards,
Kevin Liu

Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2004 19:59:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:05:56 UTC