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

RE: Comments on WSDL 1.1 Element Identifiers

From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 15:20:08 -0500
To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jonathan@wso2.com>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFCD804E0A.3F6782EA-ON8525727B.006E091E-8525727B.006F1804@ca.ibm.com>
Jonathan,

Recall that WSDL 1.1 has no <include>s (other than for 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" <jonathan@wso2.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
02/07/2007 03:01 PM

To
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
cc

Subject
RE: Comments on WSDL 1.1 Element Identifiers






I reread the document as well, and see a pretty large disconnect between 
the statement ?the fragment identifiers are to the WSDL 1.1 elements prior 
to any processing of the WSDL document, such as validation, inclusion, 
imports, schema type validation, etc.? and the whole rationale for 
designing a specialized element identification syntax.  Namely, it gives 
rise to the following problems:
 
1)      Except in the case where there are no imports or includes, simply 
making a WSDL 1.1 document available at the namespace URI is not 
sufficient to enable identification of all the WSDL elements in that 
post-import, post-include WSDL document through a namespace-based URI.
2)      Except in the case where there are no imports or includes, there 
cannot be a canonical form, as there is no equivalent to the namespace URI 
defined for imported and included documents.
 
A WSDL document, together with its imports and includes, defines a 
namespace.  Identifying an element within that namespace definition 
involves identifying which document it came from.  The WSDL 2.0 component 
designators serve little purpose beyond what could be done with generic 
XPointers except that they operate over an abstraction that covers imports 
and includes.  These WSDL 1.1 element identifiers don?t have that 
motivating factor.
 
I would investigate either defining how includes and imports are to be 
processed, so an identifier based on namespace URIs becomes workable, 
dropping the sections on constructing a canonical namespace-based 
identifier in favor of simply defining an application/xml xpointer scheme 
which users can use to locate elements within their WSDL 1.1 resources, or 
best of all to consider dropping this specialized syntax completely in 
favor of a generic syntax for identifying elements within XML documents 
(e.g. the xpath fragment scheme).
 
Also, ?The pointer parts have a scheme name that corresponds to one of the 
standard WSDL 1.1 element names, and scheme data that is a path composed 
of names that identify the elements? doesn?t seem true for Element 
Declaration or Type Definition components, which aren?t in the WSDL 1.1 
namespace.  I suspect there are lurking issues here about precisely which 
element declarations and type definitions can actually be referred to ? 
especially when schema imports and includes come into play.
 
I?d like the WSDL WG to consider forwarding these comments, and Arthur?s 
below, to the WS-Policy WG.
 
Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - 
http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On 
Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 8:52 AM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Comments on WSDL 1.1 Element Identifiers
 

In fulfilment of my action item, I reviewed the spec again [1]. 

The only problem I see is the row for Type Definitions: 

Type Definition types QName n/a n/a wsdl11.types(types) 

I think there is confusion here between the wsdl:types element and 
xs:complexType or xs:simpleType elements. 

There is no need to identify the wsdl:types element as a whole, although 
they are free to do so. 

The intension of that row should have been to identify XSD types defined 
within the wsdl:types element. These Type Definition elements are useful 
because they are used in wsdl:message parts. 

The fix is: 

Column 1: type QName 
Column Pointer Part: wsdl11.typeDefinition(type) 

Example 3.4 should be modified to include the wsdl11.typeDefinition 
identifiers. 

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl11elementidentifiers/ 

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
Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2007 20:20:38 GMT

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