RE: Assertions that are not assertions

Thank you for this comments.  The Working Group has resolved these issues as
follows:

 

Unless you let us know otherwise by the end of January, we will assume you
agree with the resolution of these issues.

 

 

Jonathan Marsh -  <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com -
<http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com

 

  _____  

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Lawrence Mandel
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 6:54 PM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Assertions that are not assertions

 


The following assertions do not appear to really be assertions at all. I
suggest removing them from the assertions table and removing their assertion
identifiers. 

Description-1201000 
WSDL 2.0 definitions are represented in XML by one or more WSDL 2.0
Information Sets (Infosets), that is one or more description element
information items. 

LM: I think this is too broad to be an assertion. 



The Working Group tracked this comment as CR096 [1].  The Working Group
removed the cited assertion, see [2].

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR096 

[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-
type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#Description_XMLRep 

 

Description-1201005 
Zero or more element information items amongst its [children], in order as
follows: 

LM: I don't think this statement contains an assertion and if this is an
assertion there are many other instances of this statement that should be
added to the assertions table. 

The Working Group tracked this comment as CR097 [3].  The Working Group
discovered that this constraint actually does test conditions not testable
in the schema.  One can write a WSDL document that is schema-valid, yet has
the top-level items out of order and thus fails this assertion.  No change
was made to the spec in response to this comment.

 

[3] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR097  

 

Types-1300002 
Specifically components that the schema imports via xs:import are NOT
referenceable. 

LM: This assertion does not use the MUST NOT convention and I think is
covered by the other schema import assertions although I think the text is
still useful in the WSDL spec. 

The Working Group tracked this comment as CR098 [4].  The Working Group
removed the assertion markup, and reworded the sentence as shown in [5], see
[6].

 

[4] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR098 

[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Dec/0052.html

[6]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-
type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#inlining-xsd 


Types-1300003 
Similarly, components defined in an inlined XML schema are NOT automatically
referenceable within WSDL 2.0 document that imported (using wsdl:import )
the WSDL 2.0 document that inlines the schema (see
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?con
tent-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#imports> 4.2 Importing Descriptions for
more details). 

LM: This assertion does not use the MUST NOT convention and I think is
covered by the other schema and WSDL import assertions although I think the
text is still useful in the WSDL spec. 

The Working Group tracked this comment as CR099 [7].  The Working Group
removed the assertion markup, and reworded the sentence as shown in [8], see
[6].

 

[7] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR099 

[8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Dec/0053.html  


Thanks, 

Lawrence Mandel

Software Developer
IBM Rational Software
Phone: 905 - 413 - 3814   Fax: 905 - 413 - 4920
lmandel@ca.ibm.com