W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > November 2006

RE: Updated wsd11elementidentifers

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:17:09 -0800
Message-ID: <E16EB59B8AEDF445B644617E3C1B3C9C02A85C2C@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

Hi Ashok,

I've gone through your attached document and done some of the changes,
but not all.  I'll be sending out an update tonight that includes all
these changes plus a bunch of error corrections in the wsdl example.  I
hope we can get this on the agenda for tomorrow, but it might be too
late.

The editorial changes have been done (abstract, intro, minor language
change, italicized names).

I have added a the missing binding operation fault

Now we get into the tricky parts.

1. I disagree with introducing Endpoint, Endpoint Component, Endpoint
Operation.  These items are not defined in WSDL 1.1.  The document as it
stands defines EI (element identifiers) for Service and Port, which are
defined in wsdl 1.1.  On principle, I do not believe in attempting to
"swizzle" the wsdl 2.0 names into wsdl 1.1 EIs. 

The question to the group would be something like "Do you prefer WSDL
1.1 element names or WSDL 2.0 component names in the WSDL 1.1 EI?".

2. I disagree with the proposed definition for portType and binding
operation in/outs.  I have used the wsdl 2.0 style for consistency.  In
the examples, I propose:
wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(TicketAgent/listFlights/In)

And you propose:
wsdl11.portTypeIn(TicketAgent/listFlights)

I think the default should be to follow the WSDL 2.0 convention for the
EI template (though not the names as I said in point #1).  

The question to the group would be something like "Do you prefer an EI
template different than the WSDL 2.0 Component Designator template?".

So, if you continue to disagree, let's just get the group to decide.
They are straightforward questions I think.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 2:28 PM
> To: David Orchard; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Updated wsd11elementidentifers
> 
> I realized that syntax for Endpoint, Endpoint Component, 
> Endpoint Operation is missing in the note.  I have added it 
> to the attached document.
> 
> All the best, Ashok
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ashok Malhotra
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:58 AM
> > To: David Orchard; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Updated wsd11elementidentifers
> > 
> > Dave:
> > I have made a few comments in the attached Word document.
> > There are also minor reference glitches etc. which I have not 
> > mentioned.
> > Let me know if you want me to make the changes.
> > 
> > All the best, Ashok
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 
> > > [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> David Orchard
> > > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 11:41 AM
> > > To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
> > > Subject: Updated wsd11elementidentifers
> > > 
> > > 
> > > At
> > > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/wsdl11eleme
> > > ntidentifi
> > > ers.html
> > > 
> > > I did a bunch of the updates that were mentioned in the meeting:
> > > 
> > > 1. added mention of diff from wsdl2.0 component ids vs
> > element ids 2. 
> > > moved example URIs into sample doc 3. fixed typos in table
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Dave
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 01:17:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:43 GMT