- From: Bob Cunnings <cunnings@whitemesa.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 14:34:18 -0600
- To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Hi, FWIW this is one of the things that I think WSDL 1.1 did right... with all references QNames, there is no chance for ambiguity, esp. when importing constructs from foreign namespaces. It's simpler to implement, and I'm not sure that it's any less convenient really... I think it makes complex docs more intelligible to a human reader if all names are qnames. RC > The WG would like to solicit your comments on whether we should > support references within a WSDL document with just an NCName > instead of always requiring a QName. > > Here's the issue from the latest part1 document: > > <issue id="issue-references-with-qname"> > <head>Should intra-namespace references using only localParts be > supported?</head> > WSDL 1.1 requires all references to be QNames. For example, a > reference to a portType from a binding element must always use > a QName even if that portType is in the same namespace and even > if it is defined in the same document. It would be convenient > to support local part references for intra-namespace references. > <source>Sanjiva Weerawarana</source> > </issue> > > Sanjiva. >
Received on Saturday, 13 April 2002 16:28:53 UTC