W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-semann@w3.org > May 2007

Re: SA-WSDL Mapping Providers

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 17:48:45 -0400
To: Tammo van Lessen <tammo.van.lessen@iaas.uni-stuttgart.de>
Cc: public-ws-semann@w3.org, Jörg Nitzsche <joerg.nitzsche@iaas.uni-stuttgart.de>
Message-Id: <1179179325.3837.64.camel@localhost>

Dear Tammo,
replies below.

On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 15:19 +0200, Tammo van Lessen wrote:
> Hi Jacek,
> thanks for you explanation!
> Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> > the schema mapping annotations point directly to the mappings. The
> > annotation doesn't give any information about the type of the mapping
> > language, but in general, resolving the URI will give you enough
> > information through metadata or the file itself. 
> What do you mean by "resolving the URI"? Would that mean that I need to 
> register all existing mapping URIs and map them to a tuple 
> (mapping_language, mapping_definition) in my SA-WSDL processor (i.e. a 
> local mapping registry)?
> I personally would prefer to define this tuple directly in the SA-WSDL 
> liftingSchema attribute, since file type guessing is not as beautiful as 
> direct identification, isn't it? ;)
> What do you think about adding a separate attribute for identifying the 
> mapping language or to merge both information into one URI?

Resolving the URI means trying to get a representation of the resource
that's identified by it. In short, to get the document from the Web. An
implementation may, but need not, map it to a tuple (location,type) for
some kind of registry. 

There is no file type guessing involved - for XML the type is generally
the root namespace, for other files it's the media type.

Putting the type in (or near) the annotation itself would be an
optimization, and I don't quite see the need for it on the specification
level here. We haven't had anybody tell us that this retrieval is a
problem, even though a few people raised preferences like yours. On the
other hand, if we did decide to identify the type of the transformation,
in what way would we do so? This question is hard enough and even the
Web doesn't seem to have a single solution, yet files are successfully
transferred and processed all the time. That's why I hesitate to
consider such typing in SAWSDL.

Hope it explains the situation,
Received on Monday, 14 May 2007 21:49:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:46 UTC