W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2004

RE: Second level xs:import

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:17:07 -0800
Message-ID: <DD35CC66F54D8248B6E04232892B633801146727@RED-MSG-43.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <ygoland@bea.com>, "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>, "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

The problem is that schema DOES NOT work that way. We've been over this
countless times. Please read the threads in the archives[1,2,3] to gain
an understanding of how we ended up where we are today.

Gudge

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Oct/0049.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Oct/0016.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Oct/0074.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yaron Goland [mailto:ygoland@bea.com] 
> Sent: 03 February 2004 23:50
> To: Martin Gudgin; 'Amelia A Lewis'; 'David Orchard'
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Second level xs:import
> 
> If I import a Schema file from namespace Foo and the Schema 
> File I imported itself imports a schema file from namespace 
> Bar then effectively the WSDL file has imported namespace Bar 
> as well and should be free to reference Bar. The inheritance 
> chain is clear. The namespaces are all explicitly declared. 
> What's the problem?
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:mgudgin@microsoft.com]
> > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 8:18 AM
> > To: ygoland@bea.com; Amelia A Lewis; David Orchard
> > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Second level xs:import
> > 
> > 
> > The *design* limitation, was that schema wanted people to be
> > *explicit*
> > about namespaces they wanted to use. So, in order to reference 
> > components in namespace foo, a schema MUST have an import for 
> > namespace foo ( or itself be a schema for namespace foo ).
> > 
> > I think it is a reasonable design decision to make for WSDL too.
> > 
> > Gudge
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Yaron Goland
> > > Sent: 26 January 2004 17:30
> > > To: 'Amelia A Lewis'; 'David Orchard'
> > > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > > Subject: RE: Second level xs:import
> > > 
> > > 
> > > While I can appreciate the wisdom in re-use, re-use 
> should only be 
> > > done with open eyes and full understanding. Do we know 
> the technical 
> > > reason why the restriction is there? If not then we should either 
> > > find out or remove the restriction.
> > > 	Thanks,
> > > 		Yaron
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> > > > Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
> > > > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 12:05 PM
> > > > To: David Orchard
> > > > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Second level xs:import
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Because that works the same way that schema import does,
> > and that's
> > > > what it's modeled on.
> > > >
> > > > Amy!
> > > > On Jan 26, 2004, at 2:54 PM, David Orchard wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Why is it illegal to reference items that are included in an 
> > > > > imported/included schema vis xs:import? (per section 3
> > of part 1)
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Dave
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2004 05:17:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:02 UTC