W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > May 2002

RE: WSDL 1.2: be infoset based on not? (was: Re: Draft wording for <import>)

From: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 16:58:12 -0700
Message-ID: <2E33960095B58E40A4D3345AB9F65EC1075EA033@win-msg-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Web Service Description" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
I think we discussed this during the requirements phase and thought that
using the XML Infoset was a good idea. For example, from [1]

R004 
The WG specification(s) MUST describe constructs using the [XML
Information Set] model (similar to the SOAP 1.2 specifications [SOAP 1.2
Part 1]). (From JS. Last revised 21 Feb 2002.)

Of course, if we find that using the XML Infoset is unwieldy or unclear,
we should revisit our decision.

--Jeff

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-desc-reqs-20020429/#genreqs 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 4:39 PM
To: Jean-Jacques Moreau; Web Service Description
Subject: WSDL 1.2: be infoset based on not? (was: Re: Draft wording for
<import>)

Hi Jean-Jacques,

You have written this in terms of the infoset. I think we need to
make a general decision on whether WSDL 1.2 should be written in
terms of the infoset or just using its XML serialization. I'm 
not certain there are other interesting serializations, but I'm
probably wrong. 

What is the general view of being infoset based?

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
To: "Web Service Description" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 9:03 PM
Subject: Draft wording for <import>


> I took a todo to provide resolution text for the
> improved-wording-for-import issue. I wasn't here when the actual
> issue was discussed, so I hope the text below properly addresses
> the issues which were raised. Comments, flames, etc at the usual
> address.
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> ----------------------
> 
> 2.1.1 Document Naming
> 
> The <el>definitions</el> element information item:
> 
>    * MUST have a [local name] of <el>definitions</el>.
>    * MUST have a [namespace name] of
>      <attval>http://www.w3.org/2002/06/wsdl</attval>.
>    * MAY have a <att>name</att> attribute information item of
>      type <att>NCName</att> in the namespace named
>      <attval>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema</attval>. Its value
>      serves as a lightweight form of documentation.
>    * MAY have a <att>targetNamespace</att> attribute information
>      item of type <att>anyURI</att> in the namespace named
>      <attval>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema</attval>. Its
>      actual value MUST NOT be a relative URI.
> 
> 2.1.2 Document Linking [ed: split from above section]
> 
> The WSDL <el>import</el> element information item allows the
> separation of the different elements of a service definition into
> independent documents, which can be imported as needed. This
> technique helps writing clearer service definitions, by
> separationg the definitions according to their level of
> abstraction, and maximizes resusability. The WSDL <el>import</el>
> element information item is modelled after the XML Schema
> <el>import</el> element information item (see [ref XML Schema
> Part 1, section 4.2.3 "References to schema components across
> namespaces"]).
> 
> The <el>import</el> element information item has:
> 
>    * A [local name] of <el>import</el>.
>    * A [namespace name] of
>      <attval>http://www.w3.org/2002/06/wsdl</attval>.
>    * An attribute information item with a [local name] of
>      <att>namespace</att>
>    * A <att>namespace</att> attribute information item of type
>      <att>anyURI</att> in the namespace named
>      <attval>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema</attval>. Its
>      actual value indicates that the containing WSDL document can
>      contain qualified references to WSDL definitions in that
>      namespace (via one or more prefixes declared with namespace
>      declarations in the normal way). This value MUST NOT match
>      the actual value of the enclosing WSDL document
>      <att>targetNamespace</att> attribute information item. It
>      MUST be identical to the actual value of the referred WSDL
>      document <att>targetNamespace</att>.
>    * A <att>location</att> attribute information item of type
>      <att>anyURI</att> in the namespace named
>      <attval>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema</attval>. Its
>      actual value is the location of a well-formed WSDL (or
>      other) document with definitions for that namespace.
> 
> An <att>import</att> element information item MUST NOT be present
> when there is no <att>targetNamespace</att> attribute information
> item in the containing WSDL document.
> 
> The WSDL <el>import</el> element information item MAY reference:
> 
>    * All standard WSDL definitions, such as service, port,
>      message, bindings and portType.
>    * Any XML namespace qualified extensibility definitions.
> 
> <note>The components to be imported MAY NOT be in the form of a
> WSDL document. A WSDL processor is free to access of construct
> components using means of itw own choosing.</note>[ed: this is in
> XSD; do we want this as well?]
> 
> [ed: move the following to the primer?]
> Example 2 below uses the <el>import</el> element information item
> to separate the definitions from Example 1 into three separate,
> more manageable documents: data type definitions, abstract
> definitions and specific service bindings.
> 
> <quote>
> http://example.com/stockquote/stockquote.xsd
> http://example.com/stockquote/stockquote.wsdl
> http://example.com/stockquote/stockquoteservice.wsdl
> </quote>
Received on Monday, 27 May 2002 19:58:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:20 GMT