- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:18:30 -0500
- To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
On further review of the WSDL 2.0 spec, I found
a form of identifier that's much closer to what I want:
| http://example.org/TicketAgent.wsdl20#wsdl.interface(TicketAgent)
-- http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-20050803/#wsdl-iri-references
That seems to be just a function of the target namespace,
the interface name, a qualifier "wsdl.interface" and some
punctuation.
The other examples, along with the inclusion of
the ".wsdl20" extension in the target namespace URI
led me to believe that I needed to include the address
of a WSDL document in the IRI, not just the target
namespace name.
The () punctuation means that such IRIs cannot be abbreviated
with QNames in RDF/XML syntax. That's a royal pain, so I
hope you'll re-consider it. But it might be acceptable;
IRIs can be written out long-hand in RDF syntaxes.
And the "wsdl.interface" qualifier is clearly redundant
in the case of the SparqlQuery interface, so I hope you'll
consider making it optional too. But it might be
acceptable.
Can you confirm that this URI...
http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query/#wsdl.interface(SparqlQuery)
refers to the interface described by the following?
<description xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/wsdl"
...
xmlns:tns="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query/#"
targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query/#">
<documentation>
This document describes the SPARQL Protocol for RDF as a web
service with one interface, SparqlQuery, containing one operation,
query; as welll as HTTP and SOAP bindings of that interface. See
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/ for the SPARQL
Protocol for RDF specification.
</documentation>
<interface name="SparqlQuery"
styleDefault="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/wsdl/style/iri">
...
</interface>
</description>
By the way, the WSDL 2 spec says
| There are two main cases for WSDL 2.0 IRIs:
|
| * the IRI of a WSDL 2.0 document
|
| * the IRI of a WSDL 2.0 namespace
but that doesn't appeal to me at all. The main case for a WSDL IRI
is to refer to things described in WSDL, i.e. interfaces and such.
Also, regarding...
| The scheme names all begin with the prefix "wsdl." to avoid name
| conflicts with other schemes.
that seems odd. The risk of XPointer scheme collision is managed
by a registry, no? You might change that to say that they're
prefixed with wsdl. for mnemonic reasons. Or you might just
get rid of the wsdl. prefix.
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:19:07 UTC