- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:37:22 +0000
- To: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4127 ------- Comment #1 from orchard@pacificspirit.com 2007-01-12 21:37 ------- Imagine an WSDL 1.1 operation that contains <input name="foo"/> <input name="bar"/> How are these elements identified? Here's my cut at the solution space, ranging from least expressive to most expressive. 1. Illegal operation. Add a normative reference and constraint that the WSDL 1.1 element identifiers can only be applied to WSDL documents that comply with the WS-I Basic Profile 1.1. The BP 1.1 section 4.5.3 disallows operation name overloading. 2. Undefined. Nothing said in WSDL EI (WEI) spec. Add text recommending WS-I BP 1.1 compliance. 3. First-only. Change WEI spec to say that only the first element is identified. Add text recommending WS-I BP 1.1 compliance. 4. Fully supported, names required on all Message References. Modify the fragment identifiers for portType operation and binding operation to deal with operation name overloading requiring that each input is named. Identifiers are then: wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(portType/operation/input("foo")) wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(portType/operation/input("bar")) 5. Fully supported with shorthand. Modify the fragment identifiers for portType operation and binding operation to deal with operation name overloading allowing but not requiring specification of name attribute. The absence of a name parameter assumes the first, and the name can be a parameter. Identifiers are then: wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(portType/operation/input) OR wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(portType/operation/input("foo")) wsdl11.portTypeMessageReference(portType/operation/input("bar"))
Received on Friday, 12 January 2007 21:37:24 UTC