W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2002

Re: updated editor's copy of WSDL 1.2 spec

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 10:25:46 +0200
Message-ID: <3D16D78A.8928C13@crf.canon.fr>
To: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
CC: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hi Sanjiva,

My initial reaction is to say no, the abstract model should not be coupled to
the infoset. But then I am wondering what does this really means. Is the
difference only in terms of terminology ("property" vs. EII?) or is it more
profound? Wouldn't both approaches essentially model a (DOM) tree? Isn't the
infoset already a suitable model?

The cut we have done for SOAP 1.2 is to describe the semantics/processing [1]
separate from the syntax [2]. Would a similar model work for WSDL?

Taking a specific example from your latest draft -section 2.2 [3]-, would it
work to keep to keep only paragraph 1 and move the rest to section [3], whilst
adding a longer description of what a message represents?

I realize I am raising more issues than providing answers... What do you


[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part1.html#msgexchngmdl
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part1.html#soapenv

Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:

> <snip/> I was wondering where the
> semantics go .. in the abstract description or at the point of
> describing the infoset for each description component?
> I wonder whether we should drop the "be infoset based" requirement
> now that we have are abstract model based. I kind of like the
> infoset description approach (I cut-n-pasted from the soap spec
> to get the template; thanks to whoever wrote that part!), but it
> does seem a bit redundant.
> <snip/>
> >    * Re. "property". Shouldn't this be EII or AII in a number of places?
> I didn't think the abstract model should be coupled to do the infoset.
> Do you? EII/AII implies a specific serialization .. one can imagine
> more than one serialization (infosets) of the same abstract model.
Received on Monday, 24 June 2002 04:26:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:24 UTC