I think there was some support for this position when we last
discussed abstractComponentRefs-37, but I don't think we
made any decisions.
So I just sent my personal view on how WSDL should map qnames to
URIs.
Anybody agree? Disagree?
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Forwarded message 1
Regarding...
C. IRI References for WSDL 2.0 Components
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-20050803/#wsdl-iri-references
Those URIs are much more complicated than they need to be:
http://example.org/TicketAgent.wsdl20#xmlns(xsTicketAgent=http://example.org/TicketAgent.xsd)
wsdl.elementDeclaration(xsTicketAgent:listFlightsRequest)
In the simple case, if there's only one component named CN in
a namespace TNS, then TNS#CN should be a standard URI for it.
e.g. given
targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query"
and
<interface name="SparqlQuery"
Then we should be able to use
http://www.w3.org/2005/08/sparql-protocol-query#SparqlQuery
to refer to that interface.
FYI, I think Henry made this argument in the TAG
regarding issue abstractComponentRefs-37
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#abstractComponentRefs-37
... for example at our june meeting.
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/06/14-16-minutes.html#item031
Henry should get only credit, not blame, in case I'm misrepresenting
his position.
See also similar comments on XML Schema component designators...
simple barenames for schema component designators 31 Mar 2005
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/1112297140.32006.540.camel@localhost;list=www-xml-schema-comments
p.s. thanks to Bijan for helping me find the relevant part of the spec
in IRC discussion
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/swig/2005-09-09#T19-51-41
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E