W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > February 2007

RE: Issue 4332: WSDL WG comment 2

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:51:18 -0800
Message-ID: <2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D64165037C6C04@uspale20.pal.sap.corp>
To: "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Cc: <dorchard@bea.com>
I have the recollection of agreeing NOT to include element/type decls.
Thus, I am somewhat confused as to why we still have them in the
document. 

Shortly, +1 to remove them. 
 
--umit
 
 

________________________________

	From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ashok Malhotra
	Sent: Wednesday, Feb 21, 2007 3:38 PM
	To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
	Cc: dorchard@bea.com
	Subject: RE: Issue 4332: WSDL WG comment 2
	
	

	I do not see a usecase for referring to element declarations and
type definitions in a WSDL 1.1 document from outside the document.

	So, I'm happy to see them removed.

	 

	DaveO, perhaps you had a reason for including these?  If so,
pray tell.

	 

	All the best, Ashok 

	
________________________________


	From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Paul Cotton
	Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 7:09 PM
	To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
	Subject: Issue 4332: WSDL WG comment 2

	 

	http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4332

	 

	The inclusion of identifiers for element declarations and type
definitions (which are not WSDL 1.1 elements) seems inappropriate in
this spec.  The presence of schema imports and includes makes
associating type definitions with a particular WSDL document, and thus
with a particular targetNamespace, problematic.  These identifiers don't
seem to be required by WS-Policy Attachment.  We recommend removing
them.  If these identifiers remain, a number of issues related to them
should be addressed, including:

	a.   How imports and includes affect them.  Are only in-lined
schema elements considered?  Only elements in a schema targetNamespace
that is the same as the WSDL targetNamespace?  If not, which ones?

	b.   Clarification in the prose of the spec that WSDL element
identifiers identify elements both in the WSDL and Schema namespaces.

	c.   Correction of the "types" vs. "type definitions" issue,
described at [1].

	                        

	[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0002.html

	 

	 

	Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
	17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
	Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
	mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
	
	
	

	
________________________________


	From: public-ws-policy-comments-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan
Marsh
	Sent: February 15, 2007 9:46 PM
	To: public-ws-policy-comments@w3.org
	Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
	Subject: WSDL WG Comments on WSDL 1.1 Element Identifiers

	 

	Follows are some comments from the WSDL WG on the WSDL 1.1
Element Identifiers draft.

	 

	1.   As in WSDL 2.0 component designators, this spec recommends
the creation of an identifier from the targetNamespace of the WSDL 1.1
document, and that this identifier can be resolved without considering
imports and includes.  Unlike WSDL 2.0, in WSDL 1.1 the targetNamespace
is not required, and although there is no wsdl11:include, we have some
evidence that some customers have used multiple wsdl11:imports of the
same namespace (which can be the same as the targetNamespace) and
different locations to modularlize their documents - and that a number
of popular tools actually support this "abuse" of import.  These
situations demonstrate the limits of the assumption of a 1-1
correspondence between a WSDL 1.1 document and a WSDL 1.1
targetNamespace.  The spec's recommendation to construct an identifier
using the targetNamespace doesn't work in these situations.  The spec
should at least note situations (edge cases) which conflict with the
advice about creation of an element identifier from the targetNamespace.

	 

	2.   The inclusion of identifiers for element declarations and
type definitions (which are not WSDL 1.1 elements) seems inappropriate
in this spec.  The presence of schema imports and includes makes
associating type definitions with a particular WSDL document, and thus
with a particular targetNamespace, problematic.  These identifiers don't
seem to be required by WS-Policy Attachment.  We recommend removing
them.  If these identifiers remain, a number of issues related to them
should be addressed, including:

	d.   How imports and includes affect them.  Are only in-lined
schema elements considered?  Only elements in a schema targetNamespace
that is the same as the WSDL targetNamespace?  If not, which ones?

	e.   Clarification in the prose of the spec that WSDL element
identifiers identify elements both in the WSDL and Schema namespaces.

	f.     Correction of the "types" vs. "type definitions" issue,
described at [1].

	                        

	Thank you.

	 

	[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0002.html

	 

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

	 

	 
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 23:49:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:47 GMT