W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2007

RE: [SPAM] Issue with IgnoreUncidedEndpoint in LocationTemplate-1G

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:40:03 +0100
To: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Cc: 'Youenn Fablet' <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>, 'keith chapman' <keithgchapman@gmail.com>, 'www-ws-desc' <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1170351604.28268.244.camel@localhost>

We just talked about adding "nillable or optional or have a default
value" to the proposal. I would suggest we give an order to this:

        "...any element not cited in tje {http location} property MUST
        be defined in the schema as nillable, or as not nillable but
        with minOccurs=0, or not nillable and with minOccurs>0 but with
        a default value."

In this way, the reconstituting side will, depending on the schema,
stick it in as nil (if it's nillable), or omit it (if it's optional) or
stick it in as empty, in this order. This assumes the reconstituting
side knows the schema, but they are expected to know the WSDL so we're
ok I think.

Jacek

On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 11:58 -0800, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> I don't think there's much practical difference between optional parameters
> and nillable parameters - though we could debate the difference between
> empty and null for months.
> 
> I'll expand my proposal for CR146 to include optional elements and
> situations like this one:
> 
>   When serializing an HTTP request method that does not allow an HTTP 
>   message body, and when {http location ignore uncited} is true, any 
>   element not cited in the {http location} property MUST be defined in 
>   the schema as nillable [[ or appear no less frequently than specified 
>   by the minOccurs value. ]].
> 
> For this test case, I think instead of adding nillable="true" I should have
> set minOccurs="1".  I'll go ahead and make that change.
> 
> Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Youenn Fablet [mailto:youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 1:31 AM
> > To: keith chapman
> > Cc: www-ws-desc; Jonathan Marsh
> > Subject: Re: [SPAM] Issue with IgnoreUncidedEndpoint in LocationTemplate-
> > 1G
> > 
> > I am then wondering how the nillable approach is better compared to the
> > first, simpler, solution that comes to mind, i.e. stating that
> > ignored parameters must be optional elements in the schema?
> >     Youenn
> > 
> > keith chapman wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The schema of LocationTemplate-1G states the following,
> > >
> > >       <xs:element name="time" type="xs:time" minOccurs="2"
> > > maxOccurs="2" nillable="true"/>
> > >
> > > But in IgnoreUncidedEndpoint in LocationTemplate-1G,
> > > whttp:location="datespace/{year}.html?start={time}". This is not
> > > schema valid because there is only 1 time value. We can fix this by
> > > changing the schema to minOccurs="1" or adding the end value to http
> > > location.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Keith.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Keith Chapman
> > > WSO2 Inc.
> > > Oxygen for Web Services Developers.
> > > http://wso2.org/
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2007 17:40:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:46 GMT