RE: Endpoint component {name} property vs xml representation as a QName

Thanks for your comment.  The WS Description Working Group tracked this
issue as a CR066 [1].

The Working Group removed the inconsistent phrase "they cannot be referred
to by QName", which has been implemented in the latest editor's draft [2].

Unless you let us know otherwise by the end of October, we will assume you
agree with the resolution of this issue.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR066
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-
type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#Endpoint_details

Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Jeremy Hughes
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 7:18 AM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Endpoint component {name} property vs xml representation as a
> QName
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Section 2.15.1 makes this statement:
> 
> "Endpoint components are local to a given Service component; they
> cannot be referred to by QName"
> 
> but then the XML representation section (2.15.2.1) says:
> 
> "The name attribute information item together with the targetNamespace
> attribute information item of the description element information item
> forms the QName of the endpoint."
> 
> surely this is inconsistent. What use is the targetNamespace of the
> name attribute if it isn't exposed in the component model? In any case
> you can't refer to an endpoint component uniquely by way of a QName -
> you need a service component {name} (a QName) and the endpoint
> component {name} (an NCName).
> 
> Thanks,
> Jeremy