Both WSDL and XML Schema have the notion of a target namespace. In XML Schema this property can be absent, denoting constructs that are not affiliated with a particular namespace. This was necessary because XML Schema describes XML instances, and elements in an XML instance may be unqualified ( not affiliated with a namespace ). The question I would like to pose is 'Does it makes sense to allow the target namespace property of WSDL components to be absent?'. And I will argue that it does not. WSDL does not describe XML instances, it describes messages, portTypes, bindings and services. I think it makes sense to mandate that these contructs always be affiliated with a namespace. To this end, I propose that we mandate the 'targetNamespace' AII on the definitions EII. And that we modify the spec to say that the value of the AII must be a non-zero length URI. Changes to spec Section 3.1 Add a bullet between current bullets 2 and 3; * A target namespace attribute information item amongst its [attributes] as described below Section 3.1.1 Add a third bullet * A type of anyURI in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace Add prose The value of the targetNamespace attribute information item MUST NOT be the empty string. GudgeReceived on Tuesday, 25 June 2002 06:08:28 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:20 GMT