W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-semann@w3.org > June 2006

Re: why distinguish between simple and complex types? (issue 11)

From: Rama Akkiraju <akkiraju@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 18:46:46 -0400
To: Rama Akkiraju <akkiraju@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>, kunal.verma1@gmail.com, "SAWSDL public list" <public-ws-semann@w3.org>, verma@cs.uga.edu
Message-ID: <OF4970FFC8.A577C7C5-ON85257184.007B6326-85257184.007D2215@us.ibm.com>

Well, may be we don't need to distinguish simple and complex types after
all. I sent that previous note too soon. :-). Here is a counter example
where a simple type may also need a schema mapping (not necessarily for
discovery but to support invocation)


<element name="fullName" type=xsd:string />

Say that in the ontology, there is a class called 'FullName' with two
subparts 'FirstName' and 'LastName'. Then this simple type can be annotated
in mulitple ways.

<element name="fullName" type=xsd:string
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#FullName" />

or

<element name="fullName" type=xsd:string
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#FullName"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#FirstName"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#LastName"/>

Both these above options are useful in discovery but may not be useful in
invocation if the service interface to be matched with has elements
'firstName' and 'lastName')

or

<element name="fullName" type=xsd:string
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#FullName"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#FirstName"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#LastName"
sawsdl:schemaMapping="URI#FullNameTokenizationLogicToMapToFirstNameAndLastName"/>

This one has all the modelReferences that could aid in discovery and also
has a string tokenization transformation function that provides explicit
mappings to first name and last name.

Regards
Rama Akkiraju

Rama Akkiraju/Watson/IBM wrote on 06/05/2006 05:59:03 PM:

> Kunal,
>
> Were you referring to precedence issues on these two examples?
> because if so, these examples don't really present such issue. In
> example 1, complex type annotaton doesn't really say anything about
> what annotations apply to leaf node elements. So, there is no conflict.
>
> I think when you mention conflicts you are talking about in the
> context where a schema mapping is specified at a complex type in
> addition to model references on the contained elements. If so, if I
> understand you correctly you are making two independent points in
> this e-mail. Is that correct?
>
> So, here is a summary of  why we need to distinguish between simple
> and complex types based on all the discussions.
>
> a simple type can only have model references and no schema mappings
> where as a complex type can have both model references and schema
> mappings. These schema mappings specified at a complex type can have
> an implication on the model references of simple types contained in
> a complex type. That's why we need to differentiate simple and complex
types.
>
> Regards
> Rama Akkiraju
>

> kunal.verma1@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2006 05:25:13 PM:
>
> > Jacek,
> >
> > From our point of view, it would be nice to be able to annotate
> > complexTypes, elements and simpleTypes. Jacek's example illustrates
> > the first two (note, we changed the outer element to complexType).
> > The second example illustrates the use of a simpleType.
> >
> > Example 1:
> >
> > <complexType name="Name" sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#name">
> >    <sequence>
> >       <element name="Title" sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#title"/>
> >       <element name="First"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#firstName"/>
> >       <element name="Last"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#familyName"/>
> >    </sequence>
> > </complexType>
> >
> > Example 2:
> >
> > <xs:simpleType name="fahrenheitWaterTemp"
> >    sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#FahrenheitWaterTemperature">
> >    <xs:restriction base="xs:number">
> >       <xs:fractionDigits value="2"/>
> >       <xs:minExclusive value="0.00"/>
> >       <xs:maxExclusive value="100.00"/>
> >    </xs:restriction>
> > </xs:simpleType>
> >
> > Finally, allowing annotations for both elements and complexTypes
> > begs the question of which takes precedence when used together. As
> > pointed out by Laurent in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/P
> > ublic/public-ws-semann/2006May/ 0043, the approach of giving the
> > element annotation precedence over the type annotation seems like
> > the way to go.
> >
> > "If some internal annotation exists for a complex type as well, any
> > "where used" annotation takes precedence over the internal one."
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John Miller and Kunal Verma
> >
> >
> > On 6/5/06, Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > below is an excerpt from Rama's analysis of the relation of
> > > modelReference and schemaMapping. The quoted part restricts
> > > modelReferences to be allowed only on schema leaf elements.
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2006-06-04 at 13:40 -0400, Rama Akkiraju wrote:
> > > > Definition of Simple modelReference:
> > > > ModelReferences that point to a single concept in the ontology via
> > > > one-to-one association. Simple modelReferences are specified
> at the level
> > > > of individual (leaf) elements in an XSD.
> > >
> > > Rama, I wonder why you have the restriction?
> > >
> > > Using the common structured name example, one could have something
like
> > > this:
> > >
> > > <element name="Name" sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#name">
> > >   <sequence>
> > >     <element name="Title" sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#title"/>
> > >     <element name="First"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#firstName"/>
> > >     <element name="Last"
sawsdl:modelReference="ontology#familyName"/>
> > >   </sequence>
> > > </element>
> > >
> > > Basically, there is a trivial one-to-one correspondence between the
> > > element Name and the ontology class "name". Do you think that
expressing
> > > this correspondence with modelReference may be harmful?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Jacek
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
Received on Monday, 5 June 2006 22:47:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:45 UTC