Re: Clarification on proposed requirement

> Eric,
> 
> The Web Services Description Working Group is seeking clarification on your 
> proposed requirement related to RDF support:
> 
> "[Draft, Should, Semantic Web] All conceptual elements in WSDL messages 
> should be addressable by a URI reference. (Added 11 April, 2002.)"
> 
> The group is concerned that this may require an ID attribute on every 
> conceptual element, which may be onerous.  Would it be reasonable, for 
> example, to reword this requirement as:
> 
> "All conceptual elements in WSDL documents should be uniquely addressable."
> 
> For example, would it be adequate to require the qnames to be unique?  Or 
> are URIs specifically needed?

As an interested outsider, I prefer the wording you suggest, David.  I think 
that requiring the name attributes of WSDL elements to be unique would be 
sufficient.  I think it would be dangerous to fix on a particular system for 
ensuring this, because, unfortunately, ID attributes are in a bit of  
practical limbo these days.  Just making this a normative clause in the WSDL 
spec should do the trick.

From my POV, the important thing is to allow a clean and clear mapping from 
WSDL elements to RDF descriptions, and ensuring unique WSDL qnames would make 
things a bit smoother, ID type or no.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                   Principal Consultant     Fourthought, Inc.
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com   http://Fourthought.com   +1 720 320 2046
XML strategy, XML tools (http://4Suite.org), knowledge management
Track chair, XML/Web Services One (San Jose, Boston): 
http://www.xmlconference.com/
Managing structured Web service metadata - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerwork
s/webservices/library/ws-wsdlrdf/
WSDL and the Wild, Wild West - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6004
XML, The Model Driven Architecture, and RDF @ XML Europe - 
http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/kttrack.asp#themodel

Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 09:34:23 UTC