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

Re: Issue 115

From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:12:53 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040318121116.03b72fe0@localhost>
To: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>

Per today's teleconference, here is suggested rewording for the second 
sentence of section 6.1.1:

[[
The presence of an optional extensibility element or attribute MAY 
therefore augment the semantics of a WSDL document in ways that do not 
invalidate the existing semantics.  However, the presence of a mandatory 
extensibility element MAY alter the semantics of a WSDL document in ways 
that invalidate the existing semantics.

Note: Authors of extensibility elements SHOULD avoid altering the existing 
semantics in ways that are likely to confuse users.
]]


>Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:30:30 -0500
>To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Jonathan Marsh" 
><jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
>From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
>Subject: Re: Issue 115
>
>It depends on what you mean by "change".  If you mean that an optional 
>extension may ADD to the existing semantics without invalidating them, 
>then I agree.  However, many people will take the word "change" to mean 
>that an optional extension may invalidate the semantics of something else 
>in the document.  We need to be clear that an optional extension does NOT 
>invalidate the semantics of anything in the WSDL document.  That's why 
>it's optional.  A mandatory extension MAY invalidate the semantics of 
>something in the WSDL document.  That's why you MUST understand it in 
>order to understand the document as a whole.  This is what section 6.1.1 
>tries to express.
>
>
>At 09:26 AM 3/17/2004 +0600, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>>IIRC the request was to explicitly state that extensions change the
>>semantics. Your wording implies that (adding props to the component
>>model) but its not explicit.
>>
>>BTW even optional extensions change the semantics. However, a processor
>>may ignore the change .. but it still does change the semantics.
>>
>>Sanjiva.
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>
>>To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>; "WS Description List"
>><www-ws-desc@w3.org>
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 7:07 AM
>>Subject: Re: Issue 115
>>
>>
>> >
>> > I think the second sentence adds more confusion than clarification,
>>because
>> > it doesn't distinguish optional extensions from mandatory extensions.  The
>> > second sentence was:
>> > [[
>> > The presence of extensibility elements and attributes MAY therefore change
>> > the semantics of a WSDL document.
>> > ]]
>> >
>> > I think it would be better to rename the title of 6.3 to "Extensibility
>>and
>> > the Component Model" and delete the second sentence, such that 6.3 reads
>>only:
>> >
>> > [[
>> > 6.3 Extensibility and the Component Model
>> >
>> > As indicated above, it is expected that the presence of extensibility
>> > elements and attributes will result in additional properties appearing in
>> > the component model.
>> > ]]
>> >
>> >
>> > At 10:43 AM 3/15/2004 -0800, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
>> >
>> > >The text added so far is at [1].  If this proves adequate, we can
>> > >reassign this issue to part three while awaiting changes there.
>> > >
>> > >[1]
>> > >http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html#exte
>> > >nsibility-semantics.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > David Booth
>> > W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
>> > Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
>
>--
>David Booth
>W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
>Telephone: +1.617.253.1273

-- 
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2004 12:13:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:30 GMT