W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > May 2012

Fw: WS-Mex dialect type

From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 12:52:06 -0400
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFB9E8F524.6DED9445-ON85257A09.005C908B-85257A09.005CAA6F@us.ibm.com>
I believe Stephan is correct. The spec has some typos and those QNames 
should be converted to the QNameSerialization strings.  Non-normative 
changes but still good changes.  Bob, what's the process here?

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.
----- Forwarded by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM on 05/25/2012 12:51 PM -----

poehlsen@itm.uni-luebeck.de 
05/07/2012 04:17 AM

To
public-ws-resource-access-comments@w3.org
cc

Subject
WS-Mex dialect type






Hello,

as far as I discovered, the dialect is a mex:QNameSerialization instead
of a xs:Qname as before.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-resource-access-notifications/2011Feb/0138.html

Are there any information available, why this was changed?

Since "Normative text within this specification takes precedence over
the XML Schema and WSDL descriptions, which in turn take precedence
over outlines, which in turn take precedence over examples." it is
quite difficult to see what seems to be right.

Especially since the serialization algorithm is only provided as a
"note" (non-normative text?) within the spec. (In the description of
the dialect attribute /mex:Metadata/mex:MetadataSection/@Dialect a
_note_ says that "the QName is serialized as
{namespace-uri}localName."
In the XML Schema exists only a regex: <xs:pattern value='\{.*\}.+'/>
In the outline in section 4 the dialect is a 'xs:Qname'
http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-metadata-exchange/#web-services-metadata

If the note is applicable Example 2-4 line 21, 27, and 34 have an
incorrect Qname serialization. It must be a QNameSerialization, same
with Example 2-6 line 19.


There is another bug:
Example 2-4 line 21 lacks an identifier. Now it is required in contrast
to the submission version of the spec.


Kind regards,
Stephan
Received on Friday, 25 May 2012 16:57:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 May 2012 16:57:15 GMT