Re: issue: externally defined semantic annotations

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Yes, you understand correctly. This is just a suggestion. I believe it can be impossible to implement, because of wsdl
constraints. Maybe someone will have a better idea, between this and dropping the issue as "out of scope".
Laurent

Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> Hi Laurent,
> 
> so if I understand it correctly, you'd copy the WSDL with the same
> namespace, refer somehow to the other one (wsdl:include?), remove
> anything not annotated and add annotations to what's left? I'm afraid
> this might make the resulting WSDL invalid, especially if you were
> aggressive about the removals, or it might not achieve the right effect,
> for example if you only annotate the schema, expecting that the included
> components will use the new one. I doubt WSDL is dynamic like this.
> 
> So what I'm saying is, I feel that external annotations would be as
> simple as you propose. 8-(
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Jacek
> 
> On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 15:46 +0200, Laurent Henocque wrote:
> The impact on the syntax simply would be to allow more elements to be optional, in what is expected to be a redundant
> "externally annotated" wsdl.
> 
> The main wsdl describes the web service.
> 
> The "external annotation" references the main wsdl, and attaches some annotations to some of its contents, while
> removing anything that requires no annotation and can be unambiguously retrieved from the main spec.
> 
> Hoping this helps
> Laurent
> 
> 
> Jacek Kopecky wrote:
>>>> Laurent, 
>>>>
>>>> do you have a concrete proposal about what this might mean to our
>>>> syntax?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jacek
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 17:22 +0200, Laurent Henocque wrote:
>>>> One way of allowing at no cost externally defined semantics would be to accept sawsdl files to be redundant with an
>>>> original wsdl spec, while abstracting of needless details.
>>>>
>>>> If an sawsdl file refers to an orginal wsdl file, and provides additional (but consistent) information, the same
>>>> language can be used to internally and externally define semantics.
>>>>
>>>> Is this possible?
>>>>
>>>> Laurent
>>>>
> --
> *************************************************************************
> Laurent Henocque
> Maître de Conférences Hdr
> tel: +33 6 83 88 20 01
> Enseignant à l'Ecole Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Luminy - Marseille
>     http://www.esil.univ-mrs.fr
> Chercheur au Laboratoire des Sciences de l'Information et des Systèmes - Marseille
>     http://www.lsis.org
> 
> clé publique open pgp / open pgp public key :
> http://www.esil.univ-mrs.fr/~henocque/0x987E183.pub.asc
> ************************************************************************
>>

- --
*************************************************************************
Laurent Henocque
Maître de Conférences Hdr
tel: +33 6 83 88 20 01
Enseignant à l'Ecole Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Luminy - Marseille
    http://www.esil.univ-mrs.fr
Chercheur au Laboratoire des Sciences de l'Information et des Systèmes - Marseille
    http://www.lsis.org

clé publique open pgp / open pgp public key :
http://www.esil.univ-mrs.fr/~henocque/0x987E183.pub.asc
************************************************************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEeyiaIF1tz5h+GDARAjb0AJ0UJ3DimDqydnr+D4X9IvV9QsRIzQCeIzkY
07a52dS+xumzD++bc0cZS6A=
=0K8n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Monday, 29 May 2006 17:00:47 UTC