- From: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 04:53:30 -0700
- To: "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org>
- CC: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>, "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
Felix: I agree we shd not use the word component wrt WSDL 1.1. Something like your sentence below is fine. >"Individual elements in the XML representation of a WSDL > 1.1 file refer to definitions that we may want to associate > Policies with." But I disagree with yr point about potential confusion between references to WSDL 2.0 components and WSDL 1.1 elements. I think the wrapper element makes the intent clear. Also, the XPointer syntax is much more user-friendly. All the best, Ashok > -----Original Message----- > From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] > Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 7:33 PM > To: Ashok Malhotra > Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org; Anish Karmarkar > Subject: Re: Bug 3599 > > Ashok Malhotra wrote: > > 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. > > agree. > > > > > 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. > > I would propose to drop the term "component". If your wording > is also meant as an input to the attachment draft, I would > say "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 should 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.) > > my requirement is: we should be clear that we don't confuse > the WSDL 1.1 and the WSDL 2.0 case. > In your proposal for issue 3730 at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Oct/a > tt-0069/Proposal_for_Bug_3730-v2.pdf > , reffering to wsdl 2.0 components looks like > > <wsp:AppliesTo> > <wsp:wsdl20Ref> > http://example.com.LoanFlow#wsdl.service(LoanFlowService) > </wsp:wsdl20Ref> > </wsp:AppliesTo> > > Now, using XPointer for WSDL 1.1 in the way you propose, could lead to > confusion: > > <wsp:AppliesTo> > <wsp:wsdl11Ref> > http://example.com.LoanFlow#wsdl.service(LoanFlowService) > </wsp:wsdl11Ref> > </wsp:AppliesTo> > > the above is IMO confusing since in the wsdl 2.0 case, you > refer to components, but in the WSDl 1.1 case, you refer to > information items in the XML representation. > > Using XPath for the WSDL 1.1 case could look like: > > <wsp:AppliesTo> > <wsp:wsdl11Ref> > http://example.com.LoanFlow#xpath2(//wsdl.service[@name='LoanF > lowService']) > </wsp:wsdl11Ref> > </wsp:AppliesTo> > > (I used XPath 2, since XPath 1 is not yet a registered > XPointer scheme at http://www.w3.org/2005/04/xpointer-schemes/). > With XPath, it becomes obvious that the WSDL 1.1. case relies > on the XML structure. > > > > > 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. > > agree, except s/XPointer to construct/XPath to construct/ . > > > > > 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. > > agree. > > Felix > >
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2006 11:55:50 UTC