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

RE: [xml-dev] schema versioning and RDDL

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 11:48:00 -0700
Message-ID: <32D5845A745BFB429CBDBADA57CD41AF077E503D@ussjex01.amer.bea.com>
To: <paul.downey@bt.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

I thought you didn't like using an string for identifying a (minor) version?

I'd still love to see having a version attribute on the wsdl definitions in scope for wsdl 2.0, but I haven't seen any folks change their mind on that issue.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of paul.downey@bt.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 5:25 AM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] schema versioning and RDDL
> 
> 
> 
> forwarded on from XML-DEV mailing list: an interesting idea for 
> describing versions of a namespace in an external RDDL document. 
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nikita Ogievetsky [mailto:nogievet@cogx.com]
> Sent: 02 May 2004 23:51
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] schema versioning and RDDL
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> I started to look at the applications of using namespace URI 
> for schema
> versioning [1], [2] and RDDL [3]; and was wondering if 
> anybody can give
> any thoughts (or had already given) to the pros and cons of 
> this approach.
> 
> The idea is to use "#" separator for namespace versioning
> (not "/" as proposed in the referenced resources), i.g:
> 
> <myObj xmlns="http://www.cogx.com/myObject#v1.0">
>   <myProp1 value="x">
> </myObj>
> <myObj xmlns="http://www.cogx.com/myObject#v1.2">
>   <myProp1 value="x">
>   <myProp2 href="http://www. cogx.com">
> </myObj>
> 
> Than an RDDL document at the http://www.cogx.com/myObject location can
> contain the following RDDL resource elements
> with ids "v1.0" and "v1.2" correspondingly:
> 
> <xhtml xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
>       xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
>       xmlns:rddl="http://www.rddl.org/">
>  <head>
>  <title>RDDL Resources for myObject </title>
>  </head>
>  <body>
>   <h1>RDDL Resources for myObject</h1>
>   <p>
>   Here we are describing myObject,
>   How it came about,
>   Its relationships to other objects,
>   its history, details,
>   and other related information
>   that can be useful for modelers and developers.
>   </p>
>   ...
>   <rddl:resource
>    id="v1.0"
>    xlink:href="http://www.cogx.com/myobject/myobject20040401.xsd"
>    xlink:title="Version 1.0 of myObject schema, approved on 
> April 1, 2004"
>    xlink:role="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema"
>    xlink:arcrole="http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation"
>   >
>   <rddl:resource
>    id="v1.2"
>    xlink:href="http://www.cogx.com/myobject/myobject20040421.xsd"
>    xlink:title="Version 1.2 of myObject schema, approved on 
> April 21, 2004"
>    xlink:role="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema"
>    xlink:arcrole="http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation"
>   >
>   ...
>  </body>
> </xhtml>
> 
> This way information about all versions of myObject can be 
> collocated in one
> RDDL document.
> 
> Does it make sense?
> --Nikita
> 
> [1] http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200103/msg00995.html
> [2] http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-tipnamsp.html
> [3] http://www.rddl.org
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 17 May 2004 14:48:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:31 GMT