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

(Open-content model + inheritance) issues

From: FABLET Youenn <fablet@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 09:42:11 +0100
Message-ID: <3DD4B363.2050902@crf.canon.fr>
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
CC: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>

At last f2f, we agreed on an operation structural equivalence, this equivalence being based on the am properties of the operation element. This seems to be a simple and reasonnable solution, but all of this gets a little trickier with the open content model, hence the following clarification questions.

First question:
What type of inheritance do we want for open-content metadata at the portType level ?
Second question:
How does the operation structural equivalence should take care of open content metadata ?

First answer:
I think that the simplest solution would be to say : none.
At now this seems reasonnable because portTypes are only sets of operations. 
If the portType contains more data than its set of operations (like ???:feature metadatas if any) then we might need something more elaborated (for instance the extension spec says whether its metadata are inheritable or not), but this might become quickly too complicated IMO (?).

Second answer
At now, the consensus, from what I have understood is the following:
Rules for two operations to be equivalent :
	- their names must be the same
	- their message names must be the same

I think that we could add something like:
	- their open-content metadata that have a wsdl:required=true must be the same (infoset-based ?)
This means that the equivalence should take into account open-content metadata but only the "important" one (required=true).
Or should it be let to the extension authors to specify that?

Last point: what about two operations that are structurally the same but are in two different portTypes, these portTypes having different open-content metadata (for instance one portType has a metadata saying: I implement only safe operations and the other has another metadata saying: I only implement dangerous but fast & fun operations). In this case, are the operations still the same? Should we take into account this case in the operation structural equivalence ? At least some clarification would be good.

Thoughts ?

Received on Friday, 15 November 2002 03:42:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:40 UTC