- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:29:11 +0200
- To: SAWSDL public list <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
Hi all, starting the work on the RDF mapping, I noticed that our spec doesn't actually add properties to WSDL components, if this requirement from our charter is to be understood using the formal terms "component" and "property" from WSDL 2.0. [1] If we add such formalities, the RDF mapping, for one, would benefit, as it could follow closely the style of the WSDL 2.0 RDF mapping document [2]. Luckily, it won't mean big changes to our spec. Here's a sketch of what I think we might add to satisfy this requirement: In section 2.1: When used on an element that represents a WSDL 2.0 Component (e.g. wsdl:interface, wsdl:operation, top-level xsd:element etc.), the modelReference extension attribute introduces an OPTIONAL property {model reference} whose value is a list of URIs taken from the value of the attribute. The absence of the {model reference} property is equal to its presence with an empty value. In section 2.2: When used on an element that represents a WSDL 2.0 Component (top-level xsd:element, xsd:complexType or xsd:simpleType), the loweringSchemaMapping and liftingSchemaMapping extension attributes introduce OPTIONAL properties {lowering schema mapping} and {lifting schema mapping}. The value of either of these properties is a list of URIs taken from the value of the respective attribute. In contrast to the {model reference} property, the absence of the {lifting schema mapping} and {lowering schema mapping} properties *is different from* its presence with an empty value, as mappings on an element must be able to override the mappings specified on the type of the element. Any comments? Jacek [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl20/#component_model [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl20-rdf/
Received on Sunday, 20 August 2006 10:29:21 UTC