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

Re: Resolution to issue 139

From: roberto chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:39:14 -0800
To: ygoland@bea.com
Cc: WS Description List <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-id: <405A4132.6070209@sun.com>

The updated type definition is consistent with the current spec and
the rest of the schema for WSDL. Modifying the schema in the way you
describe should be handled as a new, separate issue.

Roberto


Yaron Y. Goland wrote:
> Do we care that this means that it will be impossible to ever add in new 
> elements in the wsdl namespace in the future if the change is intended 
> to be backwards compatible?
>     Thanks,
>         Yaron
> 
> Roberto Chinnici wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> At the face to face we decided to accept Gudge's proposed resolution
>> for issue 139 (nondeterminism of schema for WSDL 2.0), letting the
>> editors come up with the appropriate schema gobbledygook.
>>
>> Here's a quick reminder of the issue:
>>  > The content model of wsdl:definitions is non-deterministic. I 
>> notice it
>>  > has been this way since the substitution group based extensibility was
>>  > removed on 2003-08-04. I note in passing that one of the reasons we 
>> went
>>  > with substitution groups was that it gave us a deterministic
>>  > content-model. The only fix I can see given the current grammer is to
>>  > change the content model of wsdl:definitions to be <xs:any
>>  > namespace='##any' minOccurs='0' maxOccurs='unbounded' />, which 
>> doesn't
>>  > capture any of the contraints regarding wsdl:include, wsdl:import,
>>  > wsdl:types, but there you go!
>>
>> Over beers, Gudge and I discussed a slight improvement over an element
>> wildcard, i.e.
>>
>>    <xs:complexType name='DefinitionsType' >
>>      <xs:annotation>
>>        <xs:documentation>
>>          Please refer to the WSDL 2.0 specification for
>>         additional constraints on the contents of this type.
>>        </xs:documentation>
>>      </xs:annotation>
>>      <xs:complexContent>
>>        <xs:extension base='wsdl:ExtensibleDocumentedType' >
>>          <xs:choice minOccurs='0' maxOccurs='unbounded' >
>>            <xs:element ref='wsdl:import' />
>>            <xs:element ref='wsdl:include' />
>>            <xs:element ref='wsdl:types'/>
>>            <xs:element ref='wsdl:interface' />
>>           <xs:element ref='wsdl:binding' />
>>           <xs:element ref='wsdl:service' />
>>            <xs:any namespace='##other' processContents='lax' />
>>          </xs:choice>
>>         <xs:attribute name='targetNamespace' type='xs:anyURI' 
>> use='required' />
>>        </xs:extension>
>>      </xs:complexContent>
>>    </xs:complexType>
>>
>> This way at least we make it easier to spot which WSDL elements
>> can appear under definitions. Plus, the order they're listed in
>> is also intended to suggest the correct one.
>>
>> I modified the schema in CVS to use the definition given above,
>> please let me know if there are any problems with it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roberto
>>
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2004 19:39:15 GMT

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