W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-semann@w3.org > January 2007

Re: [Fwd: Section on adding model references to inputs and outputs]

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:24:05 +0100
To: SAWSDL public list <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1170080645.28268.36.camel@localhost>

Ajith, 

On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 11:48 +0100, Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> A similar text to the following may be needed to make things clear.
> 
> "In order to define semantics that apply to inputs and outputs of an
> operation,  input and output elements can also be annotated with the
> model reference. This is equivalent to adding model references to the
> relevant schema element and should be interpreted accordingly. If the
> element has an annotation already, in the scope of this operation it
> is considered to have both the input/output level annotation and the
> element specific annotations."

There is a problem with "this is equivalent to adding model references
to the relevant schema element". In particular, consider this scenario:

<types>
  <schema>
    <element name="ack"/>
  </schema>
</types>
<interface>
  <operation name="a">
    <output element="ack" modelReference="a_ack" />
  </operation>
  <operation name="b">
    <output element="ack" modelReference="b_ack" />
  </operation>
</interface>

This would be equivalent to 
  <element name="ack" modelReference="a_ack b_ack"/>
which is not what you want, if I understand it correctly.

Apart from this, your proposal sounds reasonable, yet I would like to
see more details - in particular, how exactly would your modelReferences
on the two ack outputs differ? Can you please give us the WSDL annotated
with any SAWSDL annotations that you would use there, so it's clearer
what exactly you want to do with them?

Best regards,
Jacek
Received on Monday, 29 January 2007 14:24:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 17 April 2012 12:14:27 GMT