W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-media-types@w3.org > September 2004

RE: Issue 252 (reopen)

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:50:29 -0400
Message-ID: <80A43FC052CE3949A327527DCD5D6B2776770B@MAIL01.bedford.progress.com>
To: "Umit Yalcinalp" <umit.yalcinalp@ORACLE.COM>, <public-ws-media-types@w3.org>, "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>


Umit:

> There is yet a third way of accomplishing the same goal, by 
> keeping the annotation component but using an attribute part 
> of the annotation. 

Hm.  I think you are still operating under a slight misconception.  When
you use an extension attribute a la:

<xs:element name="picture" type="myNS:image"
            xmlmime:expectedMediaType="image/*"/>

That ***IS*** an annotation.  The purpose of the "attributes" part of
the annotation schema component is precisely so that attributes from
other namespaces have a place to appear in the component model.  So the
element component would look something like:

element {
  name : "picture"
  type : "myNS:image"
  annotation : {
    documentation : {}
    appInfo : {}
    attributes : [
      xmlmime:expectedMediaType : "image/*"
    ]
  }
}

Note that the "documentation" and "appInfo" parts of the annotation
component are empty.  Please reread the example in the schema spec [1],
specifically the paragaph right before section 3.13.3 (along with the
example) for more on this.

Once this becomes clear, I think further consideration of the issue,
except perhaps as a result of feedback from soapbuiders, becomes
unnecessary.

Thanks,
--Glen

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#cAnnotations
Received on Friday, 10 September 2004 22:50:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:08:52 GMT