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

Re: Do <import> and <include> support extensibility elements?

From: John Kaputin (gmail) <jakaputin@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:38:59 +0000
Message-ID: <4c2ae8f80512051138w2b0b6099m2bc534f5ba0e4c5b@mail.gmail.com>
To: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>, Amelia A Lewis <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: woden-dev@ws.apache.org, www-ws-desc@w3.org
Arthur/Amelia,
I don't have an opinion, but I note Amelia's concerns. I have implemented
Woden per Part 1 for now, with extensibility in <import> and <include>, but
I can change that to match any final decision.

John.


On 12/5/05, Amelia A Lewis <alewis@tibco.com> wrote:
>
>
> I have an opinion.  FWIW.  :-)
>
> import and include should *not* permit extensibility elements.  It
> fuzzes up the component model, and serves no purpose that I can think
> of.
>
> Jonathan, I think this is CR1 (even before CR!).
>
> Amy!
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 11:11:32 -0500
> Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> >John,
> >
> >You're right. The schema contradicts the spec. I'd don't see a lot of
> >use for allowing extensibility elements in the <include> and
> ><import>elements since they do not map to WSDL components. However, in
> >the spirit of extensibility and consistency, I supposed we should
> >allow it, in which case the schema needs to be corrected. Do you have
> >an opinion either way?
> >
> >Arthur Ryman,
> >IBM Software Group, Rational Division
> >
> >blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
> >phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
> >assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
> >fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
> >mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@fido.ca
> >
> >
> >
> >"John Kaputin (gmail)" <jakaputin@gmail.com>
> >Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> >12/04/2005 02:40 PM
> >
> >To
> >www-ws-desc@w3.org
> >cc
> >woden-dev@ws.apache.org, kaputin@uk.ibm.com
> >Subject
> >Do <import> and <include> support extensibility elements?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >I'd like to clarify which WSDL elements support extensibility
> >elements.
> >
> >Part 1, section 6.1 Element based Extensibility states:
> >WSDL 2.0 allows namespace-qualified element information items whose
> >[namespace name] is NOT "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/wsdl" to appear
> >among the [children] of specific element information items whose
> >[namespace name] is "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/wsdl".
> >
> >The word 'specific' suggests some WSDL elements do not support
> >extensibility elements. This is backed up by the WSDL 2.0 schema at
> >http://www.w3.org/2005/08/wsdl/wsdl20.xsd which indicates that all
> >WSDL 2.0 elements except <import> and <include> support extensibility
> >elements.
> >
> >However, in Part 1 all of the sections that describe the xml
> >representation for each WSDL element state that the [children] of the
> >WSDL element may contain:
> >Zero or more namespace-qualified element information items whose
> >[namespace name] is NOT "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/wsdl"
> >
> >i.e. this text applies to <include> and <import> too, in sections 4.1
> >and 4.2, which seems to contradict the schema.
> >
> >Is this correct? Can <include> and <import> have extensibility
> >elements?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >John Kaputin.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Amelia A. Lewis
> Senior Architect
> TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> alewis@tibco.com
>
>
Received on Monday, 5 December 2005 19:39:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:37 GMT