Bug 3599

Felix summarized the position on this issue in his note.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Oct/0057.html

Let me make a concrete proposal.  I will number the steps in this proposal
so people can refer easily to the step they agree or disagree with.

1. There is a requirement that it shd be possible to associate Policies with individual elements
in an XML representation of a WSDL 1.1 file using the external attachment mechanism defined in
section 3.4 of the WS-Policy Attachment document.

2. Although WSDL 1.1 does not define the term "component" we understand that individual elements
in the XML representation of a WSDL 1.1 file refer to definitions that we may want to associate Policies
with.  That is, it shd be possible to make these elements the subject of a Policy.

3. XPointer spec says that it is "...intended to be used as a basis for fragment identifiers for any resource whose Internet media type is one of text/xml, application/xml, text/xml-external-parsed-entity, or application/xml-external-parsed-entity. Other XML-based media types are also encouraged to use this framework in defining their own fragment identifier languages."  (Note that the XPointer syntax is based on XPath 1.0 with an important shortcut: if an element information item has
an attribute or child element that is of type ID, the value of that attribute/element can be used to refer to the element.  Thus, for example, the XPath syntax: /element-name(ID='X') can be abbreviated as /X.)

4. The media type for used for WSDL 1.1 files is text/xml so the XPointer framework can be used to generate fragment identifiers for WSDL 1.1 files.   Thus, starting with the URI of a file that contains WSDL 1.1 definitions in XML format we can use XPointer to construct URI references to identify individual elements in a WSDL 1.1 file.

5. These URI References can then be used (with a suitable wrapper) as Domain Expressions in an AppliesTo element in the 
external attachment mechanism described in section 3.4 of the Policy Attachment document.

If the WG agrees on the approach, I can spell out the exact syntax.


All the best, Ashok

Received on Friday, 6 October 2006 21:49:48 UTC