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

Re: Extensions

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 21:35:34 +0600
Message-ID: <014301c2065d$51879380$c267b809@lankabook2>
To: "Sedukhin, Igor" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>, "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>, "WS-Desc WG \(Public\)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
"Sedukhin, Igor" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com> writes:
> 
>>If needed we can put an ed note in the working draft saying we're
>> considering adding more flexibility and see whether we get feedback
>> asking for it.
> 
> By the time we get feedback, it may be too late to make it flexible.
> By then all WSDL processors will already be implementing logic that
> we have spec'ed out.

Based on first working draft? I don't think people will jump so fast to 
adopt all this stuff. In any case, WDs are meant for getting feedback
and showing direction AFAIK.

> I'm also concerned by the complexity of Jeffrey's wordings. May be,
> at the initial stages of defining extensions we can get a simple 
> explanation of what it means before we get into formal 
> specifications. I suggest adding this clause:
> 
> "When declaring an extension (explicit), all its elements that
> appear in the WSDL document are by default required for 
> understanding by WSDL processors (i.e. wsdl:required = true). 
> Optional extensions do not have to be declared (implicit) or 
> may be declared specifying wsdl:required = false.
> An extension element may override wsdl:required attribute, 
> in which case the element is required or not regardless of 
> the extension declaration. By default an extension element 
> does not override the wsdl:required attrubute and rules 
> apply according to the extension declaration (explicit 
> or implicit)."
> 
> It does not sound very complex (to me :) and WSDL processor
> implementations may easily take it into account.

Do we have a use-case to justify this level of flexibility in
extensions?

Sanjiva.
Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 11:36:07 GMT

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