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

Re: Can one inline schema import definitions from a second inline schema?

From: Jim Murphy <jmurphy@mindreef.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:41:03 -0400
Message-ID: <3F93D3F8.4030700@mindreef.com>
To: paul.downey@bt.com
Cc: mgudgin@microsoft.com, umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com, ryman@ca.ibm.com, www-ws-desc@w3.org




We've had trouble from the lack of clarity when layering wsdl:import 
over xsd:import.

How about importing inlined schema contained in the types section of an 
imported wsdl?

1.  What does schemaLocation mean?
2.  What are the precedence rules if namespace collisions are detected?


Jim Murphy
Mindreef, Inc.

paul.downey@bt.com wrote:

> I'm not sure I understand how is WSDL 2.0 clearer in this regard than WSDL 1.1 ? 
> 
> My concern is unless the rules are absolutely clear on how to reference across in-line schemas, it will require profiling out again in 2.0.
> 
> I assume the WS-I prohibited importing an in-line schema namespace because the 1.1 rules were unclear, not because of some other interoperability issue ?
> 
> Paul
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:mgudgin@microsoft.com]
> Sent: 19 October 2003 15:23
> To: Downey,PS,Paul,XSJ67A C; umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com; ryman@ca.ibm.com
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Can one inline schema import definitions from a second
> inline schema?
> 
> 
> The BP is defined over WSDL 1.1, and it's true that in WSDL 1.1 the schema processing rules are unclear.
> 
> I think WSDL 2.0 is much clearer in this regard and see no real reason to prohibit references across in-line schemas.
> 
> Gudge 
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
>>[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of paul.downey@bt.com
>>Sent: 19 October 2003 08:57
>>To: umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com; ryman@ca.ibm.com
>>Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
>>Subject: RE: Can one inline schema import definitions from a 
>>second inline schema?
>>
>>Ümit wrote:
>>
>>		I would rather see inlined schemas to 
>>dissappear altogether from WSDL. Instead of discussing the 
>>semantics and the interpretation of inlined schemas within 
>>WSDL, the problem can be left to Schema completely. 
>>		
>>
>>I've thus far found stand-alone WSDLs very useful, but if the 
>>rules are unclear how to reference between in-line schemas, 
>>and the BP effectively prohibits it, then I agree: we should 
>>consider removing inline schemas from WSDL.
>> 
>>Paul
>> 
>> 
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 13:41:34 GMT

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