Minutes: XML Schema Patterns for Databinding F2F August 2007

Minutes from last week's F2F are now available here:

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/7/8/03-databinding-minutes.html

and copied below for trackbot's searching




                                   - DRAFT -

                               Databinding WG F2F

3 Aug 2007

   Agenda

   See also: IRC log

Attendees

   Present
          Jon Calladine (BT)
          George Cowe (Origo Services Limited)
          Paul Downey (BT)
          Yves Lafon (W3C)

   Regrets
   Chair
          pauld

   Scribe
          pauld

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Administrivia
         2. c-erh-1 : typo "casue"
         3. lc-i18n-1 : BOM link to Unicode FAQ
         4. lc-i18n-2 : Working with Time Zones
         5. c-i18n-3: language type to reference BCP47
         6. lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set
         7. lc-Microsoft-3: Nested Sequences and sequences other than
            minOccurs=maxOccurs=1
         8. lc-Microsoft-2: Element References
         9. lc-Microsoft-5: maxOccurs=finite
        10. lc-Microsoft-7: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1
            ...
        11. lc-Microsoft-8: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 in
            the same inheritance chain
        12. Review of Testing Report
     * Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________________



Administrivia

   minutes from the 12/6 and 10/7 approved
   []

   pauld: We spent the past couple of days working on the test report,
   deploying the patterns detection service and building a collection of
   patterns detected in schemas and WSDLs found "in the wild".

   pauld: ok, so we've added some minOccurs patterns, been resurrecting
   our report (re-run later!)
   ... yves has a hard-stop at 1:45, jon at 14:45
   ... so we have last call issues to answer, a databinding report to
   review, and a list of schemas in the wild to look at
   ... not being doing a great job of tracking LC issues thanks to issues
   with eXit
   ... let's look at the mail archive, the minutes from Nice and make sure
   we've not lost any

   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/7/2/F2F-databinding-minutes.html

   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/7/2/lc-issues/issues.html

   pauld: this is going to be painful, but let's make sure we have minuted
   RESOLUTIONS for all of them

c-erh-1 : typo "casue"

   we haven't done the polite thing and replied to the commenter

   RESOLUTION: accepted and closed c-erh-1

lc-i18n-1 : BOM link to Unicode FAQ

   RESOLUTION: accepted and closed lc-i18n-1

lc-i18n-2 : Working with Time Zones

   RESOLUTION: accepted and closed lc-i18n-2

c-i18n-3: language type to reference BCP47

   RESOLUTION: accepted and closed c-i18n-3

lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set

   RESOLUTION: accepted and closed lc-drkm-1

lc-Microsoft-3: Nested Sequences and sequences other than
minOccurs=maxOccurs=1

   pauld: after testing, Microsoft are right, sequence with a cardinality
   not of 1 isn't well implemented

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to move sequence patterns with minOccurs or
   maxOccurs !=1 to Advanced [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/08/03-databinding-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-125 - Move sequence patterns with minOccurs
   or maxOccurs !=1 to Advanced [on Paul Downey - due 2007-08-10].

   RESOLUTION: accepted and closed lc-Microsoft-3 as Advanced patterns

lc-Microsoft-2: Element References

   looking at our test report
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/examples/6/09/ElementReference/
   is well supported and
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/examples/6/09/ElementReferenceUnq
   ualified is already "Advanced"

   gcowe: I agree with Microsoft

   pauld: being cautious I'd want to remove it too

   pauld: we discussed this in Nice and decided to at least add another
   pattern to ensure the reference was within the same schema document

   jonc: doesn't everyone use this pattern?

   pauld: um, not sure. I think for document/literal wrapped some tools
   generate this?
   ... might be nice if our collection report listed patterns used in a
   roll-up report

   gcowe: they asked to remove these patterns?

   pauld: moved to advanced is what I think they meant
   ... I'm happy to move it to advanced based on what's used in the wild

   jonc: we use it in our schemas/wsdls

   pauld: internal ones?

   jonc: I'll show you ..

   pauld: so the BT "header" is an element referenced in another namespace
   and this works well with tools?

   jonc: yes!

   pauld: OK so we haven't seen evidence this doesn't work

   RESOLUTION: reject lc-Microsoft-2 rejected based on testing

lc-Microsoft-5: maxOccurs=finite

   <gcowe>
   http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/gdsc/schemaHtml/AddressTypes-v1-4-xsd-UKPosta
   lAddressStructure.htm demonstrates finite maxoccurs

   <gcowe> http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/schemasstandards/schemalibrary.asp

   pauld: will cover these in our collection:
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/collection/

   OK, so people use them, but from our report they don't work well with
   tools

   RESOLUTION: accepted lc-Microsoft-5 finite maxOccurs patterns are
   Advanced

lc-Microsoft-7: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 ...

   which examples exhibit this?

   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/examples/6/09/BareVector/
   actually works fine

   they say: "We suggest to recommend wrapped collection pattern as
   preferred" we can accept that .. I guess .. and "exclude bare array
   pattern"

   which based on testing and how widely spread the pattern is we reject

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to add advice that BareVector doesn't allow
   representation of null as opposed to empty arrays [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/08/03-databinding-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-126 - Add advice that BareVector doesn\'t
   allow representation of null as opposed to empty arrays [on Paul Downey
   - due 2007-08-10].

   RESOLUTION: accepted lc-Microsoft-7 in part

   <gcowe>
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/examples/6/09/ComplexTypeSequence
   Extension/

   example doesn't exhibit their issue

   pauld: so we haven't tested it?
   ... this pattern is very common with inheritence in OO
   ... we could add a pattern to Advanced to capture their issue?
   ... I don't think we need to given sequence with maxOccurs/minOccurs !=
   1 is now Advanced

   so their issue is covered, but the pattern stays

lc-Microsoft-8: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 in the same
inheritance chain

   RESOLUTION: rejected lc-Microsoft-8

Review of Testing Report

   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/all.html

   AnyURIElement seems problematic with ZSI - they uriescape the URI

   seems like the user of that tool would work around that issue, we use
   anyURI a *lot*

   and we use ZSI ;-)

   AttributeFixed failed in SOAP4R, it's an edge case - advanced?

   pauld: no objections to making AttributeFixed "advanced"

   AttributeOptional is Advanced

   AttributeReference is definitely Advanced!

   AtributeRequired fails in IBM and SOAP4R

   AttributeTypeReference fails in Axis, Axis2 and others

   gcowe: some of these are failing on boolean comparison

   yves: will review the comparison

   <gcowe>
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_ibm_rad_java
   _7.0.html#AttributeRequired01 should be marked as boolean

   <Yves>
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_axis_java_1.
   4.html#AttributeElementNameClash01

   so SOAP4R doesn't handle multiple attributes!

   and we don't have specific tests for that

   <Yves>
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_axis2_java_1
   .1.1.html#BooleanElement04

   s/BooleanAttribute fails BooleanElement works, go figure!//

   AttributeOptional is expressing the default!

   let's keep that basic!

   Base64BinaryAttribute is advanced

   <Yves>
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_gsoap2_2.7.9
   f_c.html#AttributeReference01

   pauld: any examples based on a complete schema haven't been tested,
   including blockDefault, but these are mostly harmless

   <Yves>
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_spring_java_
   1.0m3_castor_1.1.html#BooleanAttribute01

   I raised a lc issue on Date and Time, but DateTime looks problematic

   jonc: can't remove that

   pauld: OK, so all dates, times and not datetime are advanced

   gcowe: IBM tool seems to have a lot of issues in this area!

   Decimal is advanced

   ENTITY and ENTITIES are advanced, they barf and use DTDs

   Axis 1.4 is behaving like a SOAP encoded toolkit, shockingly bad:

   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_axis_java_1.
   4.html#ElementMaxOccursUnbounded02

   Float is advanced!

   that's pretty fundamental

   used by lots of schema generation tools

   ID and IDREF don't work ID with ZSI

   Integer is Advanced

   and NonPositive - we don't have good test cases for

   <Yves> need to add test for overflow detection

   thanks Yves, see you next time!

   Language fails in ZSI, not widespreadly used - Advanced

   NMTOKEN/NMTOKENS is advanced

   TypeSubstitutionUsingXsiType is Advanced

   all the unsigned types are advanced

   jonc: NillableOptional is definitely Advanced

   pauld: agreed, with strong feeling!

   we discussed this to death in ISSUE-7

   jonc: nillable is something people want

   pauld: i don't want it ;-)

   gSOAP fails with nillable

   we could argue that the echo test isn't fair to gSOAP here:

   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/edcopy/report/report_gsoap2_2.7.9
   f_c.html#NillableElement01

   OK, let's keep Nillable

   OK, let's regenerate the patterns, examples and reports ..

   pauld: Thanks to George and Origo for hosting, once again!

   ADJOURNED

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to add advice that BareVector doesn't allow
   representation of null as opposed to empty arrays [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/08/03-databinding-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to move sequence patterns with minOccurs or
   maxOccurs !=1 to Advanced [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/08/03-databinding-minutes.html#action01]

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________________

Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2007 14:55:24 UTC