RE: simple case of IRIs for Components in WSDL 2.0

Are you suggesting that the form of the component identifier should be
dependent upon what other (local) identifiers are in the document?  That
we should define an identifier to a component that might lose its
property of unique identification when other (unrelated but perfectly
legal) components are added to the document?

This might be possible when you're trusting some infrastructure like
Schemas, DTDs or xml:id to ensure no duplicate identifiers occur, but in
our case duplicates (between symbol spaces) are completely legal.

Your suggestion seems quite unstable in the face of WSDL evolution and
the distribution of components between multiple documents, the full
combination of which might not be available until runtime.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-desc-
> comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dan Connolly
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 1:19 PM
> To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
> Cc: Bijan Parsia; Henry S. Thompson
> Subject: simple case of IRIs for Components in WSDL 2.0
> 
> 
> Regarding...
> 
>   C. IRI References for WSDL 2.0 Components
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-20050803/#wsdl-iri-references
> 
> Those URIs are much more complicated than they need to be:
> 
> http://example.org/TicketAgent.wsdl20#xmlns(xsTicketAgent=http://examp
> le.org/TicketAgent.xsd)
>         wsdl.elementDeclaration(xsTicketAgent:listFlightsRequest)
> 
> In the simple case, if there's only one component named CN in
> a namespace TNS, then TNS#CN should be a standard URI for it.
> 
> e.g. given
>  targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query"
> 
> and
> 
>  <interface name="SparqlQuery"
> 
> Then we should be able to use
>  http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query#SparqlQuery
> 
> to refer to that interface.
> 
> FYI, I think Henry made this argument in the TAG
> regarding issue abstractComponentRefs-37
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#abstractComponentRefs-
> 37
> 
> ... for example at our june meeting.
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/06/14-16-minutes.html#item031
> 
> 
> Henry should get only credit, not blame, in case I'm misrepresenting
> his position.
> 
> 
> See also similar comments on XML Schema component designators...
> 
> simple barenames for schema component designators  31 Mar 2005
> http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/1112297140.32006.540.camel@localhost;lis
> t=www-xml-schema-comments
> 
> 
> p.s. thanks to Bijan for helping me find the relevant part of the spec
> in IRC discussion
>  http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/swig/2005-09-09#T19-51-
> 41
> 
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
>

Received on Monday, 12 September 2005 18:34:27 UTC