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

RE: Idle question

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:01:47 -0700
Message-ID: <32D5845A745BFB429CBDBADA57CD41AF0B4D2072@ussjex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Given that wsdl 1.1 doesn't preclude the wsdl 2.0 components, would it
be possible to "cast" a subset of WSDL 1.1 constructs into the WSDL 2.0
component model via include/import?  I realize that "cast" is the rat
hole, but is it even technically feasible?

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Martin Gudgin
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 7:59 PM
> To: Sanjiva Weerawarana; Amelia A Lewis
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Idle question
> 
> 
> The xs:import element does two things.
> 
> 1.	It signals that the schema containing the import uses components
> from a namespace other than the target namespace of the containing
> schema.
> 2.	If there is a schemaLocation, it indicates where one can
> retrieve a resource containing such components.
> 
> Regarding the latter, the result of retrieving such a resource on the
> WWW must be an xs:schema element (although there is no requirement
that
> the root element of the retrieved resource be an xs:schema ). See
> section 4.3 of Schema Part 1[1]
> 
> xs:include is similar.
> 
> To me, if I wsdl20:include or wsdl20:import a resource that does not
> result in a wsdl20:definitions element (either as the root element or
> such an element identified by fragid ) then at best I get no
components
> and at worst it's an error.
> 
> Gudge
> 
> [1]
>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#composition-instance
> s
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana
> > Sent: 26 October 2004 21:35
> > To: Amelia A Lewis
> > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Idle question
> >
> >
> > OK what I meant is this: If we do *nothing extra* then the wsdl11
> > namespace will not be recognized as WSDL by a WSDL 2.0 processor.
> > Thus any WSDL 1.1 element that's placed in a WSDL 2.0 document
> > will be just an extension element.
> >
> > If someone attempts to import WSDL 1.1 (or XSD or YourML or MyML)
> > stuff via wsdl20:import then it will fail as we have specifically
> > defined import semantics at the component model level and there
> > are no WSDL 2.0 components there.
> >
> > If someone attempts to include I guess the same thing will occur,
> > but I have to read that part again to see what we say precisely.
> >
> > Gudge, you did worked on most of the import/include stuff - do
> > you agree?
> >
> > Amy, does this make sense? I also do not want to support WSDL 1.1
> > import/include - it simply doesn't make sense as we'd have to
> > define an equivalence relation to make it go. ARGH! More work!!
> >
> > Sanjiva.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
> > To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
> > Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 12:48 AM
> > Subject: Re: Idle question
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I don't understand that answer.
> > >
> > > I'm working on implementation, and one of the areas of
> > implementation is
> > > import (and include; *sigh* that include was included).  It
> > is natural
> > > enough that WSDL 1.1 cannot import WSDL 2.0.  Is it true
> > that WSDL 2.0
> > > cannot import or include WSDL 1.1?  This seems a painful
limitation
> > > (although it makes the work go faster).  If it *can*, what are the
> > > semantics of the included components?
> > >
> > > It would probably be enough to say "WSDL 2.0 documents
> > cannot import or
> > > include WSDL 1.1 documents" to clarify the situation.  I
> > *do* think we
> > > need a clarification, though, because as it stands, the
> > import/include
> > > descriptions talk about including WSDL, not just WSDL 2.0.
> > >
> > > Amy!
> > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:11:37 +0600
> > > Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > You can of course import it but since those elems would simply
be
> > > > extension elements ...
> > > >
> > > > Sanjiva.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
> > > > To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:47 PM
> > > > Subject: Idle question
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Heylas,
> > > > >
> > > > > So, can a WSDL 2.0 document import or include a WSDL
> > 1.1 document?
> > > > >
> > > > > Presumably, 1.1 cannot import 2.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > Amy!
> > > > > --
> > > > > Amelia A. Lewis
> > > > > Senior Architect
> > > > > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> > > > > alewis@tibco.com
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Amelia A. Lewis
> > > Senior Architect
> > > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> > > alewis@tibco.com
> >
> >
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2004 19:01:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT