- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 16:10:45 +0200
- To: verma@cs.uga.edu
- Cc: Rama Akkiraju <akkiraju@us.ibm.com>, SAWSDL public list <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
Kunal, do you have any specific scenario where precedence rules would be useful? I feel that if the type says it is an Address, and the element that uses the type says it is DeliveryAddress, both do apply, right? I don't really see how we could specify that DeliveryAddress applies more. If there is a conflict, like the type says it is a "Mammal" and the element says it is a "Car", that would make an inconsistent (and invalid) SAWSDL document, and I don't think we should hide this problem by specifying that only Car applies for this particular use of what elsewhere would be Mammal. So in a nutshell, I don't think we need precedence or resolution rules if we call inconsistent documents invalid. Best regards, Jacek On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 17:25 -0400, Kunal Verma wrote: > 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/Public/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."
Received on Tuesday, 6 June 2006 14:37:35 UTC