RE: Editorial: more .. schema vs. schema document

Thank you for the comment below, and for your patience with us in
resolving it.  We tracked the comment below as Issue LC67 [1].  The
editors have addressed the editorial matters you highlight below in
their latest drafts [2].

If you agree with our disposition of your comment, we'd like you to
acknowledge it within two weeks; otherwise we will assume you are
satisfied.  The WG plans to enter a second (short) Last Call period in
the near future, and we invite you to review that publication as well.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC67
[2] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-desc-
> comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Asir Vedamuthu
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 5:57 AM
> To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Editorial: more .. schema vs. schema document
> 
> 
> [On behalf of the XML Schema WG]
> 
> Part 1 says: "The schema components defined in the embedded schema are
> available to WSDL for reference by QName (see 2.18 QName resolution).
> Note
> that only components defined in the schema itself and components
> included by
> it via xs:include are available to WSDL. Specifically components that
> the
> schema imports via xs:import are NOT available to WSDL." - -
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-wsdl20-20040803/#embed-xsd
> 
> we think it should say:
> 
> "The schema components defined >and declared< in the embedded schema
> >document< are available to WSDL for reference by QName (see 2.18
> QName
> resolution). Note that only components defined >and declared< in the
> schema
> itself and components included by it via xs:include are available to
> WSDL.
> Specifically components that the schema imports via xs:import are NOT
> available to WSDL."
> 
> On behalf of the XML Schema WG,
> 
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> asirv at webmethods dot com
> http://www.webmethods.com/