RE: WSDL 2.0 Primer (Not Core), section 2.3.3, "xs:include"

David,

I saw the resolution and agree. We are NOT changing XSD semantics.

Arthur Ryman,
IBM Software Group, Rational Division

blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@fido.ca



"Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org
10/27/2005 06:02 PM

To
"RDBMS" <RDBMS@aol.com>
cc
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <kevin.liu@sap.com>, 
<public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Subject
RE: WSDL 2.0 Primer (Not Core), section 2.3.3, "xs:include"






Hi J Bean,
 
Interesting point.  I believe I created that table in the primer, and I 
don't think I thought about the chameleon case when I wrote it, so it 
sounds like something should be added to address it.  However, Arthur and 
Kevin are probably more up on the spec than me right now.
 
Arthur?  Kevin?   Can you comment?
 
Thanks,
David Booth
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: RDBMS [mailto:RDBMS@aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 5:20 PM
To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
Cc: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston); WSDL - Arthur Ryman
Subject: Fw: WSDL 2.0 Primer (Not Core), section 2.3.3, "xs:include"

I referenced the "Core" rather than Primer. This comment refers to the 
Primer.
 
My Apologies !
 
J. Bean
P.O. Box 30171
Phoenix, AZ  85046-0171
 
RDBMS@aol.com
XML-Guy@hotmail.com
----- Original Message ----- 
From: RDBMS 
To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org 
Cc: WSDL - Booth, David (HP) ; WSDL - Arthur Ryman 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:53 PM
Subject: WSDL 2.0 Core, section 2.3.3, "xs:include"

I believe that the table (2-1) and column "meaning" may be incomplete as 
to xs:include, or it imposes a restriction on XML Schema within WSDL that 
is not constrained by XML Schema alone.
 
The current text in this table for xs:include notes:
 
"Merge XML Schema components from another XML Schema document that has the 
SAME targetNamespace."
 
This text implies/states that an xs:include(d) schema MUST have a 
targetNamespace, which is not true.
 
The notion of a "chameleon" schema is one that implements an xs:include 
from a parent schema (often a proxy or umbrella schema). The xs:include(d) 
schema in this example is not required to have a targetNamespace. That is, 
the xs:include(d) namespace might not have any namespace at all, or it can 
have the same targetNamespace.
 
The parent or xs:include(ing) schema would then act as a proxy to apply 
its namespace to all xs:include(d) and referenced declarations (assuming 
it has a targetNamespace, which is also not required).
 
If the xs:include(d) schema does not have a targetNamespace declared, it 
is then coerced into the namespace of the xs:include(ing) parent schema 
(again, if that parent schema has a targetNamespace). In this case and by 
virtue of having no targetNamespace, the xs:include(d) schema does NOT 
have the same namespace as the xs:include(ing) schema. This condition 
would appear to violate the text in table 2-1.
 
If the xs:include(d) schema does have a targetNamespace declared, it then 
MUST be the same as the xs:include(ing) parent schema (this condition is 
satisfied by the text in table 2-1).
 
Was the intent of the working group such that the current application of 
targetNamespace and xs:include as allowed by XML Schema is not allowed 
when implemented via a WSDL <types/> reference ?
 
J. Bean
P.O. Box 30171
Phoenix, AZ  85046-0171
 
RDBMS@aol.com
XML-Guy@hotmail.com