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

Re: Is an assertion required for {http location} EBNF grammar?

From: John Kaputin (gmail) <jakaputin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 17:02:26 +0100
Message-ID: <4c2ae8f80705080902g49cf8407s764be44df01dc95d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "WS-Description WG" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Cc: woden-dev@ws.apache.org
I'd like to propose replacing the text associated with the EBNF grammar in
section 6.8.1.1:

"The following EBNF [ISO/IEC 14977:1966] grammar represents the patterns for
constructing the request IRI"

 with the new assertion HTTPSerialization-2106:

"The {http location} property MUST conform to the following EBNF [ISO/IEC
14977:1966] grammar, which represents the patterns for constructing the
request IRI."

regards,
John Kaputin.

On 5/4/07, John Kaputin (gmail) <jakaputin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is no WSDL assertion stating that an {http location} or
> whttp:location must conform to the EBNF grammar defined in Part 2 Section
> 6.8.1.1.
>
> Consider the following whttp:location values, which do not conform to this
> EBNF grammar:
>
> "/to}wn/{localname}"  (unmatched left brace)
> "/town/{local:name}"  (template does not specify an NCName)
> "/town/{localname"    (closing right brace is missing)
>
> Should these be considered WSDL errors? If so, should there be an
> assertion about the EBNF grammar?  Apache Woden parses the whttp:location
> attribute and if it does not conform to the EBNF grammar the {http location}
> property is flagged as invalid, but there is no WSDL assertion to use for
> error reporting.
>
> Alternatively, Woden could just ignore these grammar errors and treat them
> as ordinary string content in {http location} but the problem would still
> need to be resolved when the request IRI is constructed by the message
> builder.
>
> John Kaputin.
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2007 16:02:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:47 GMT