- From: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:03:17 -0400
- To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
I have one concern regarding this discussion. Jonathan said: > > That is, the targetNamespace attribute acts as a kind of default > > namespace for name attributes, but not for type attributes. The default namespace is whatever namespace is defined as xmlns="uri" -- and in most circumstances, the default namespace (if there is one) is the wsdl namespace, not the targetnamespace. If we're following schema syntax rules, then we should require a Qname in the <binding type= attribute. After all it might refer to a <portType> defined in an imported schema. Anne > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:34 AM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using > ncnames? > > > Discussion on this topic seems to have died down. Do we have > consensus to leave intra-document cross-refs as-is with > improved wording? > > Sanjiva. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Gudgin" <martin.gudgin@btconnect.com> > To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 3:59 AM > Subject: Re: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using > ncnames? > > > > I would suggest we leave WSDL in line with XML Schema. In XML Schema the > > name AIIs of things are all NCNames and the names of things at the > top-level > > ( child EIIs of the schema EII ( let's forget about keys for > now )) become > > part of the target namespace for that schema. So the full name of such > > constructs is a QName; {namespace name, localname}. All references in > schema > > are QNames; element refs, attribute refs, group refs, attribute > group refs > > and type refs ( again leaving keys out ) > > > > This AFAIR is the state of affairs in WSDL today WRT message, > portType and > > binding. All of these constructs have a name AII which becomes > part of the > > target namespace. message EIIs are referred to by message AIIs on input, > > output and fault EIIs. portType EIIs are referred to by the > type AII on a > > binding EII. binding EIIs are referred to by the binding AII on a port > EII. > > > > The element and type AIIs on part EIIs can also be used to refer to > > constructs in XML Schema in the same way. > > > > This approach works. It's been proven to work in XML Schema. It > deals well > > with constructs from multiple namespaces. It helps when building modular > > descriptions. I can't see any reason why we would want to move away from > > this. > > > > Gudge > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> > > To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:34 PM > > Subject: RE: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using > > ncnames? > > > > > > > Hmmm, I got something completely different, and less > fundamental, out of > > > the discussion of this issue at the FTF. > > > > > > <definitions name="StockQuote" > > > targetNamespace="http://example.com/stockquote.wsdl" > > > xmlns:tns="http://example.com/stockquote.wsdl" > > > ...> > > > <portType name="StockQuotePortType" > > > ... > > > </portType> > > > <binding name="StockQuoteSoapBinding" > type="tns:StockQuotePortType"> > > > ... > > > </binding> > > > ... > > > </definitions> > > > > > > What I thought Keith said at the FTF is that it is common to > forget the > > > "tns:" in the binding/type attribute. The type attribute looks like a > > > reference to the name attribute, but the lexical values don't match. > > > That is, the targetNamespace attribute acts as a kind of default > > > namespace for name attributes, but not for type attributes. > It's a bit > > > confusing that xmlns declarations aren't used for placing something in > > > the namespace, but they are used for referring to that something. The > > > redundancy of the information carried by the targetNamespace and > > > xmlns:tns attributes clearly shows that parallel mechanisms are > > > employed. > > > > > > Some possible (mostly syntactic) solutions are: > > > 1) Make both name and type QNames. But then it's different from XML > > > Schema. > > > 2) Make both name and type NCNames. But then it's different from XML > > > Schema. > > > 3) Make the type attribute recognize the default namespace of the WSDL > > > document -- I think that's the suggestion in the issue text. But then > > > it's not a real xs:QName. > > > 4) Make sure the spec or primer addresses this point of confusion > > > thoroughly. But then who reads the spec :-). > > > > > > Did I totally miss Keith's point? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:21 PM > > > > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > > > > Subject: issue: support cross references within a WSDL file using > > > ncnames? > > > > > > > > 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 Wednesday, 24 April 2002 09:02:16 UTC