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

RE: WSDL 1.1 element identifiers extensions, not defined

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:10:34 -0800
Message-ID: <E16EB59B8AEDF445B644617E3C1B3C9C02B9E711@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

I was kind of right... And kind of wrong...

WSDL 2.0 defines 3 extensions, but for the majority of their components
they don't because they are attributes.  So I took what they did for the
3 elements and in a similar style defined that for the soap binding
only.  The refresh is at
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/wsdl11elementidentifi
ers.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8

Note, I'm not sure if we can get away with the element decls on the
soap:header.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard
> Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 2:05 PM
> To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: WSDL 1.1 element identifiers extensions, not defined
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Chris asked for an extension in wsdl 1.1, and Asir suggested 
> using the SOAP binding.  At this point, I don't believe there 
> is a WSDL 1.1 or WSDL 2.0 identifier for HTTP, SOAP or MIME 
> bindings.  That's because their Xpointer schemes are not defined.  
> 
> I've asked the WSDL 2.0 group about this, whether I'm missing 
> something or not.  Assuming I'm right, that leaves us a few choices:
> 1. Do nothing, that is do not support identifers for the 
> HTTP, SOAP or MIME bindings.
> 2. Create identifers for a subset of the elements defined.  One fairly
> reasonable set seems to be the SOAP bindings.   This is fairly
> straightforward to do.  Call this option #2 (soap only) 3. 
> Create identifers for all the elements defined.  
> 
> I can live with either #1 or #2 (soap only) but I think that 
> the http and mime bindings in wsdl 1.1 are almost never used 
> and so is well outside an 80/20 point.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 25 November 2006 00:11:27 GMT

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