W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > April 2005

Re: Contradictions regarding transitivity of wsdl:import

From: Amelia A Lewis <alewis@tibco.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 14:48:27 -0400
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-Id: <20050413144827.61cc3dc7.alewis@tibco.com>

Thank you, Gudge.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 11:30:24 -0700
"Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Yes there is. As noted above the components defined in B are in one
> namespace whereas the components B imports from C are in another
> namespace. The wsdl:import in A specifies that it is importing
> components in the namespace of B.

I winced, back when I discovered that we had added an include mechanism
to WSDL.  People regularly confuse the two mechanisms, and the language
of our spec often conflates import and include, quite possibly in
places where the distinction is very important.  I believe that the
issue David raises here may be one such case in point.

It might be worthwhile to review the specification for conflation of
these mechanisms (any place where the specification says "include" and
"import" in the same sentence) to verify that the distinction is noted
where necessary.

Amy!
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Senior Architect
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2005 18:48:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:35 GMT