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

[LC75f] FW: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:22:35 -0700
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A507E85993@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

More on our comment requesting that (at least some) attributes be
allowed on the RPC wrapper.

I was incorrect in my comment that we commonly sign the children of
soap:Body, instead we most often sign the entire soap:Body element.

However, the prohibition against attributes may prohibit future
scenarios (signing different parts of the message as an example).  The
reasons for prohibiting them are unclear.  If it is to preserve a clean
one-to-one mapping between children elements and parameters, that can be
accomplished through mechanisms that don't rule out potential useful
cases.  In a similar case the WG recieved comments from I18N about the
inability to put xml:lang on wsdl:documentation.

Another mechanism to prevent attributes from carrying application data
that might reasonable appear in a function signature would be to allow
only extension attributes (namespace qualified), and to specifically
note the intention that these attributes are allowed for infrastructure
purposes and do not appear (e.g.) as parameters in the wrpc:signature.


-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan
Marsh
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 3:37 PM
To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
Subject: RE: WSDL 2.0 LC Comments


We accept the resolutions to all of the issues except the 5 noted below:

> > -----
> > Section 2.4.2 RPC Style is unclear as to whether local element
> > children
> > may contain extension attributes.  Such attributes should be
> > explicitly
> > allowed; for instance as identifiers to enable the element to be
> > signed
> > (xml:id, wsu:Id).
> 
> The WG does not believe the current text precludes extension
> attributes and closed this issue (LC75f) [9] without action.
> 
> [9] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC75f

Our issue text was apparently not very clear.  We commonly sign the
children of <soap:Body>, and to do this requires the ability to add
@wsu:Id.  The statement "The complex type that defines the body of an
input or an output element MUST NOT contain any attributes" precludes
this.  Please allow at least extension attributes to be added.
 
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 22:22:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:36 GMT