Chris, having read your first paragraph, I thought you were going to suggest something like <wsdl:types> <xs:include .../> </wsdl:types> or even <wsdl:definitions> <xs:include .../> </wsdl:definition> I think this would make type system extensibility in WSDL play nicely with the rest of WSDL extensibility; working the same way, really. What do you think? Jacek Kopecky Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation http://www.systinet.com/ On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 01:28, Christopher B Ferris wrote: > Jacek's points are well taken. Why not then leverage xs:include as that > would > seem to be more approriate given Jacek's points. > > e.g. > <wsdl:types> > <xs:schema ...> > <xs:include > schemaLocation="http://example.org/yadda/mystuff.xsd"/> > </xs:schema> > </wsdl:types> > > Cheers, > > Christopher Ferris > Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com > phone: +1 508 234 3624 >Received on Saturday, 12 October 2002 11:59:51 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:21 GMT