W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Schemas in imported WSDL

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:24:28 -0500
To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>, "Amelia A. Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: tomj@macromedia.com, abrookes@roguewave.com, WS-Description WG <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-id: <045c01c3aba5$b505de00$7b00a8c0@AURORA>

OK, we all (except perhaps for Amy) seem to be on the same page with respect
to using an explicit xs:import to pull in schema, and a WSDL processor
having the ability (but not the requirement) to make an inlined schema
within an imported WSDL available for xs:import.

The question of what, if anything, we say about this is still open, though.

A strawman : we put text in the spec to the effect that WSDL processors
SHOULD make schema namespaces embedded in the <types> sections of imported
WSDLs available to their schema processors for xs:import where possible.  I
can see two situations where processors couldn't/woudln't do this:  1) for
security or other reasons, there is a locally controlled version of the
imported schema namespace already, and we don't want to override that one
with something imported from a potentialy untrusted WSDL.  2) the schema
processor being used by the WSDL processor does not have any API with which
to pre-seed the import.

These cases are clearly OK, but in general if someone is building a new WSDL
processor following our spec, I think it would be good to indicate that they
SHOULD do this if possible.  This might improve the chances that any given
WSDL document will be consumable by any given processor.

--Glen

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>; "Jacek Kopecky"
<jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>; "Amelia A. Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: <tomj@macromedia.com>; <abrookes@roguewave.com>; "WS-Description WG"
<www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 8:07 PM
Subject: RE: Schemas in imported WSDL


OK, once more, with feeling...

Scenario 1.

WSDL A imports WSDL B which imports Schema C.
WSDL A DOES NOT import anything else.

In this case, Schema C is only visible to WSDL B.

Scenario 2.

WSDL A imports WSDL B which imports Schema C.
WSDL A imports the schema C namespace.

In this case it would be OK for the WSDL processor to satisfy the import
in WSDL A of Schema C with the schema it imported for WSDL B.

Note that there is probably no way to force WSDL processors to behave
this way, but nevertheless it would be reasonable behaviour.

Note that the ONLY difference between these two cases is that in the
latter case WSDL A *EXPLICITLY* imports the Schema C namespace.

An explicit import of a given namespace is a necessary and sufficient
condition to use components from that namespace.

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com]
> Sent: 14 November 2003 12:08
> To: Martin Gudgin; Jacek Kopecky; Amelia A. Lewis
> Cc: tomj@macromedia.com; abrookes@roguewave.com; WS-Description WG
> Subject: Re: Schemas in imported WSDL
>
> OK, now I'm confused. :)
>
> I would certainly a) LIKE this to be the case, and b) like
> the spec/primer to say something about it, but I'm surprised
> to hear you say this, Gudge, after the earlier conversation.
> I thought when you said "The schema constructs defined in
> Schema C are only visible to WSDL B, they are not visible to
> WSDL A", you meant that they were not visible even in the
> face of an explicit "xs:import".  I gather that was Amy's
> interpretation as well, judging from her message.
>
> Are you saying that WSDL processors may do this, should do
> this, or must do this (where "this" == "make the schema in
> WSDL B available for import to WSDL A via xs:import")?
>
> --Glen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
> To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>; "Jacek Kopecky"
> <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>; "Amelia A. Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
> Cc: <tomj@macromedia.com>; <abrookes@roguewave.com>;
> "WS-Description WG"
> <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 3:00 PM
> Subject: RE: Schemas in imported WSDL
>
>
>
> Hang on. The case Jacek has listed below SHOULD work. Why?
> Because WSDL A has EXPLICITLY imported that namespace. And
> the WSDL processor that's dealing with WSDL A and WSDL B can
> use the schema from WSDL B to satisfy the import in WSDL A.
>
> Gudge
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com]
> > Sent: 14 November 2003 08:05
> > To: Jacek Kopecky; Amelia A. Lewis
> > Cc: Martin Gudgin; tomj@macromedia.com; abrookes@roguewave.com;
> > WS-Description WG
> > Subject: Re: Schemas in imported WSDL
> >
> > > I also agree on the semantics as far as Gudge formulated it.
> > >
> > > But I thought WSDL A can use schema C inlined in WSDL B if WSDL A
> > > wsdl:imports WSDL B and xs:imports schema C (probably
> omitting the
> > > location attribute).
> >
> > That was pretty much the jist of the conversation we had at
> the F2F;
> > whether or not there should be any guarantee of being able
> to do just
> > that.  Apparently the answer is "no", though.
> >
> > --G
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Received on Saturday, 15 November 2003 13:24:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:27 GMT