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

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

From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 09:57:36 -0500
To: "John Kaputin (gmail)" <jakaputin@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, kaputin@uk.ibm.com, woden-dev@ws.apache.org, www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFAD09633A.59DDD5FF-ON852570D2.0050FEF8-852570D2.00522C79@ca.ibm.com>
John,

Great. Yes, the CVS version has entities so "simplify" the renaming of 
namespaces as the dates change. The updated schema was just posted at [1]

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/12/wsdl/wsdl20.xsd

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> 
12/09/2005 09:40 AM

To
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, kaputin@uk.ibm.com, 
woden-dev@ws.apache.org, www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Subject
Re: Do <import> and <include> support extensibility elements?






Arthur,
I have tested your fix and it works fine. WSDL containing extension 
elements under <import> and <include> generates schema validation errors 
when using the original wsdl20.xsd and does not generate these errors 
running with your new wsdl20.xsd. 

I made a slight change to your wsdl20.xsd to get it running in my test 
environement, but that was independent of <import> and <include>. I 
replaced entity refs used for targentNamespace and xmlns:wsdl with the 
actual WSDL 2.0 url and removed the  !ENTITY statement.

thanks,
John Kaputin.




On 12/8/05, Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com> wrote:

John, 

I just committed the corrected schema. [1] Please verify the fix. Thx. 

[1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.xsd 

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 


"Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
12/08/2005 12:39 PM 


To
"John Kaputin \(gmail\)" <jakaputin@gmail.com>, < www-ws-desc@w3.org> 
cc
<woden-dev@ws.apache.org>, <kaputin@uk.ibm.com> 
Subject
RE: Do <import> and <include> support extensibility elements?








Thanks for raising this issue.  The WG agreed that the schema needs to be 
fixed to indicate that extensibility elements are allowed on import and 
include elements.  We are attempting to put this in place prior to our 
publication of the Candidate Recommendation. 
  



From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On 
Behalf Of John Kaputin (gmail)
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 11:41 AM
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.
Received on Friday, 9 December 2005 15:00:55 GMT

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