- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:43:13 -0800
- To: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>, "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <DD35CC66F54D8248B6E04232892B6338017EA453@RED-MSG-43.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Have you implemented it already? ;-) Gudge P.S. I've always thought it mildly amusing to have an attribute whose name is element ( or vice versa ) ;-) ________________________________ From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Jordahl Sent: 16 March 2004 11:01 To: 'Arthur Ryman' Cc: 'WS Description List' Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 We just changed the name of this attribute to "element". -1 to changing it AGAIN. -- Tom Jordahl Macromedia Server Development -----Original Message----- From: Arthur Ryman [mailto:ryman@ca.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 1:05 PM To: Tom Jordahl Cc: 'Jonathan Marsh'; 'WS Description List'; www-ws-desc-request@w3.org Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 Correction to my note: s/elementReference/element/ Same comment applies. It's not an element anymore. Arthur Ryman, Rational Desktop Tools Development phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077 assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411 fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920 mobile: +1-416-939-5063 intranet: http://w3.torolab.ibm.com/DEAB/ Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 03/16/2004 09:30 AM To "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'WS Description List'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> cc Subject RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 Jonathan, You meant to say "elementReference is the name of a type so it would NOT appear in the syntax" Right? -- Tom Jordahl Macromedia Server Development -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 4:48 PM To: WS Description List Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 elementReference is the name of a type so it would appear in the syntax. I like messageBody better too. Or I suppose we could just get rid of the reference altogether, right? <xs:attribute name="element" > <xs:simpleType> <xs:union memberTypes="xs:QName"> <xs:simpleType> <xs:restriction base="xs:token"> <xs:enumeration value="#any" /> <xs:enumeration value="#empty" /> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> </xs:union> </xs:simpleType> </xs:attribute> ________________________________ From: Arthur Ryman [mailto:ryman@ca.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 12:58 PM To: Sanjiva Weerawarana Cc: Jacek Kopecky; Jonathan Marsh; WS Description List; www-ws-desc-request@w3.org Subject: Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 Sanjiva, The XML Schema looks fine except for a couple of minor errors. Here's a corrected version: <xs:attribute name="element" type="elementReference" /> <xs:simpleType name="elementReference"> <xs:union memberTypes="xs:QName"> <xs:simpleType> <xs:restriction base="xs:token"> <xs:enumeration value="#any" /> <xs:enumeration value="#empty" /> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> </xs:union> </xs:simpleType> However, I dislike the name of the attribute, elementReference, since the whole point of introducing it was to allow the case where there is no element reference. How about @messageBody or @bodyContent instead? Arthur Ryman, Rational Desktop Tools Development phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077 assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411 fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920 mobile: +1-416-939-5063 intranet: http://w3.torolab.ibm.com/DEAB/ "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 03/11/2004 10:50 PM To "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>, "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> cc "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> Subject Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 Looks good to me too .. however I'll let Arthur indicate an IBM position as I can barely spell schiema let alone make value judgements about the goodness of using unions. Sanjiva. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com> To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> Cc: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:58 PM Subject: Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 > > I applaud the elegance of this proposal. 8-) > I hope it will be accepted. > > Jacek > > On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 18:55, Jonathan Marsh wrote: > > Issues 146 [.1] and 150 [.2] were inadvertently left off the FTF agenda. > > Sorry my bad. Here's a simple proposal for addressing these issues, > > assuming we find merit in adding this functionality. > > > > Issue 146 Should WSDL be able to describe an operation with *anything* > > in the message? [.1] > > > > Issue 150 Indicating empty bodies [.2] > > > > When using XML SchemaS, The element attribute points to a QName of a > > GED, preventing either empty bodies, or unconstrained content. Special > > values of the element attribute could indicate these conditions. > > > > Status quo: > > <xs:attribute name="element" type="xs:QName" use="optional" /> > > > > Proposal: > > <xs:attribute name="element" type="elementReference" use="optional" /> > > > > <xs:simpleType name="elementReference"> > > <xs:union> > > <xs:simpleType memberTypes="xs:QName"> > > <xs:restriction base="xs:token"> > > <xs:enumeration value="#any"/> > > <xs:enumeration value="#empty"/> > > </xs:restriction> > > </xs:simpleType> > > </xs:union> > > </xs:simpleType> > > > > (I hope I have got that syntax right. Should be enough to spark > > discussion anyway...) > > > > [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x146 > > [.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x150 > >
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2004 14:43:43 UTC