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

Re: WSDL Action Item: Review LC75s Table

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:46:25 +0100
To: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
Cc: "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-id: <4225D1C1.7010301@crf.canon.fr>

Asir,

I like the way you've recast the table. I think we should keep it in the 
spec, the prose is hard to understand without (not talking about Z). I'd 
be in favour of making the first column title more a little more 
explicit (currently, "WSDL composition"), it's a bit blunt as is and 
needs the surrounding context, but I don't have any alternative to 
suggest right now.

JJ.

Asir Vedamuthu wrote:

> This is one of my action items ...
>
> > 2005-02-17: Asir to review table on how import and include actually 
> work (added by JJM)
>
> For LC75s <http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC75s>, we 
> decided to incorporate a table that describes the visibility of XML 
> Schema components in WSDL. On the call, we formulated the names and 
> number of columns and rows in this table; location of the table; 
> etc. I see some problems with LC75s decision. A copy of the first 
> attempt 
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#tab_SchemaVisibility> 
> is:
>
> Table 3-1. Visibility of schema components
>
>
> 	Directly in WSDL 	In schema
> |xs:import| 	All components from the imported namespace are visible to 
> WSDL (the schema must have an identical targetNamespace). 	Components 
> imported by the schema itself are NOT visible to WSDL.
> |xs:include| 	All components included are visible to WSDL (the 
> included schema must NOT have a namespace already). 	All components 
> included by the schema itself are visible to WSDL (the schema included 
> in the schema must NOT have a namespace already).
> |wsdl:import| 	The embedded schemas contained in the imported WSDL 
> document are NOT visible to WSDL. 	n/a
> |wsdl:include| 	The embedded schemas contained in the included WSDL 
> are visible to WSDL (as long as they share the same 
> targetNamespace). 	n/a
>
>
> In this table, ...
>
> Two products are involved: WSDL and XML Schema. This table cuts 
> through multiple levels: XML Representation (xs:import, WSDL 
> document), Mapping from XML Representation to Components 
> (xs:import-->schema), and Component Model (embedded schema, schema, 
> components ...) I like to emphasize that this cuts through multiple 
> levels in two products.
>
> Other issues are, this table includes information that is beyond 
> visibility. Example: "the schema must have an identical 
> targetNamespace". But, that is a constraint. Most of these constraints 
> are repetition. They are described in other parts of the spec. 
> 'xs:include' is not allowed in WSDL.
>
> Another observation is, the information in this table is beyond the 
> scope of Section 3, say wsdl:import and wsdl:include elements.
>
>
>         Suggested Alternate Solution ..
>
> WSDL composition model offers four simple possibilities: including 
> description, importing description, importing XML Schema and Embedding 
> XML Schema.
>
> The goal is to describe the visibility of XML Schema components in 
> the WSDL Description component for these four possibilities. In simple 
> terms (recapitulating from different parts of the spec), at the 
> component level (just one level, in one product):
>
>    1. Including Description (description/include) - XML Schema
>       components in the included Description component's {element
>       declarations} and {type definitions} properties are visible.
>    2. Importing Description (description/import) - None of the XML
>       Schema Components in the imported Description component are visible.
>    3. Importing XML Schema (description/xs:import) - Element
>       Declaration and Type Definition components in the imported
>       namespace are visible.
>    4. Embedded XML Schema (description/types/xs:schema) - Element
>       Declaration and Type Definition components in the embedded XML
>       Schema are visible.
>
> Transcribing this into a table:
>
> WSDL Composition
> 	
> XML Representation
> 	
> Visibility of XML Schema Components
> Including Description    	description/include    	XML Schema 
> components in the included Description component's {element 
> declarations} and {type definitions} properties are visible
> Importing Description 	description/import    	None of the XML Schema 
> Components in the imported Description component are visible
> Importing XML Schema    	description/xs:import    	Element Declaration 
> and Type Definition components in the imported namespace are visible
> Embedded XML Schema    	description/types/xs:schema    	Element 
> Declaration and Type Definition components in the embedded XML Schema 
> are visible
>
>  
>
> Let me frame the questions that we should ask .
>
>     * Revisit LC75s?
>           o if Yes ..
>           o Accept the suggested alternate table?
>           o Location of the table: section 3 or appendix
>           o Normative or non-normative?
>     * Or, treat this material as purely editorial
>
> Regards,
>  
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> asirv at webmethods dot com
> http://www.webmethods.com/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *To:* www-ws-desc@w3.org
> *Subject:* WSDL Action Item: Review LC75s Table
>
> This is one of my action items ...
>
> > 2005-02-17: Asir to review table on how import and include actually 
> work (added by JJM)
>
> For LC75s <http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC75s>, we 
> decided to incorporate a table that describes the visibility of XML 
> Schema components in WSDL. On the call, we formulated the names and 
> number of columns and rows in this table; location of the table; 
> etc. I see some problems with LC75s decision. A copy of the first 
> attempt 
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#tab_SchemaVisibility> 
> is:
>
> Table 3-1. Visibility of schema components
>
>
> 	Directly in WSDL 	In schema
> |xs:import| 	All components from the imported namespace are visible to 
> WSDL (the schema must have an identical targetNamespace). 	Components 
> imported by the schema itself are NOT visible to WSDL.
> |xs:include| 	All components included are visible to WSDL (the 
> included schema must NOT have a namespace already). 	All components 
> included by the schema itself are visible to WSDL (the schema included 
> in the schema must NOT have a namespace already).
> |wsdl:import| 	The embedded schemas contained in the imported WSDL 
> document are NOT visible to WSDL. 	n/a
> |wsdl:include| 	The embedded schemas contained in the included WSDL 
> are visible to WSDL (as long as they share the same 
> targetNamespace). 	n/a
>
>
> In this table, ...
>
> Two products are involved: WSDL and XML Schema. This table cuts 
> through multiple levels: XML Representation (xs:import, WSDL), Mapping 
> from XML Representation to Components (xs:import-->schema), and 
> Component Model (embedded schema, schema, components ...) I like to 
> emphasize that this cuts through multiple levels in two products.
>
> Other issues are, this table includes information that is beyond 
> visibility. Example: "the schema must have an identical 
> targetNamespace". But, that is a constraint. Most of these constraints 
> are repetition. They are described in other parts of the spec. 
> 'xs:include' is not allowed in WSDL.
>
> Another observation is, the information in this table is beyond the 
> scope of Section 3, say wsdl:import and wsdl:include elements.
>
>
>         Suggested Alternate Solution ..
>
> WSDL composition model offers four simple possibilities: including 
> description, importing description, importing XML Schema and Embedding 
> XML Schema.
>
> The goal is to describe the visibility of XML Schema components in 
> the WSDL Description component for these four possibilities. In simple 
> terms (recapitulating from different parts of the spec), at the 
> component level (just one level, in one product):
>
>    1. Including Description (description/include) - XML Schema
>       components in the included Description component's {element
>       declarations} and {type definitions} properties are visible.
>    2. Importing Description (description/import) - None of the XML
>       Schema Components in the imported Description component are
>       visible.
>    3. Importing XML Schema (description/xs:import) - Element
>       Declaration and Type Definition components in the imported
>       namespace are visible.
>    4. Embedded XML Schema (description/types/xs:schema) - Element
>       Declaration and Type Definition components in the embedded XML
>       Schema are visible.
>
> Transcribing this into a table:
>
> WSDL Composition
> 	
> XML Representation
> 	
> Visibility of XML Schema Components
> Including Description    	description/include    	XML Schema 
> components in the included Description component's {element 
> declarations} and {type definitions} properties are visible
> Importing Description 	description/import    	None of the XML Schema 
> Components in the imported Description component are visible
> Importing XML Schema    	description/xs:import    	Element Declaration 
> and Type Definition components in the imported namespace are visible
> Embedded XML Schema    	description/types/xs:schema    	Element 
> Declaration and Type Definition components in the embedded XML Schema 
> are visible
>
>  
>
> Let me frame the questions that we should ask .
>
>     * Revisit LC75s?
>           o if Yes ..
>           o Accept the suggested alternate table?
>           o Location of the table: section 3 or appendix
>           o Normative or non-normative?
>     * Or, treat this material as purely editorial
>
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> asirv at webmethods dot com
> http://www.webmethods.com/
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2005 14:47:28 GMT

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