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

Re: Resolution to issue 139

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:21:11 +0100
To: ygoland@bea.com
Cc: Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>, WS Description List <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1079702471.19112.10.camel@localhost>

Yaron, 

I think we're content with having to use extensibility for such changes
in the future. At least I am. 8-)

Jacek

On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 00:21, 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 Friday, 19 March 2004 08:21:17 GMT

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