- From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 17:45:49 -0700
- To: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- CC: "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org, "'Sanjiva Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Hi, The http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/ has the schema for the (core) WSDL Spec only. Are there updated versions for SOAP Binding Schema, HTTP Binding Schema and the MIME Binding schema? Or are the versions of these as in the spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl) most up to date we have? I know they have problems also. Hence I ask. Thanks, Prasad -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Conflicts of WSDL schemas Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 15:47:00 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: www-ws-desc@w3.org Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 15:45:30 -0400 From: "Francisco Curbera" <curbera@us.ibm.com> To: "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com> CC: www-ws-desc@w3.org, "'Sanjiva Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>,"'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> There were several errors reported on the first schemas (those included with the WSDL spec). I think most (or many) of them were corrected in the new set, released later under http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/. Apparently other were introduced... Still, I believe this set one is much closer to be correct, but it may not be close enough :-) In case of doubt the specification text and examples should be the definitive guide. Regarding the problem that is mentioned below, the template of Section 2.1 should be followed, though I personally would prefer to have extensibility enabled *anywhere* directly under <definitions> (before, after, in the middle). Regards Paco "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com>@w3.org on 04/26/2002 01:55:42 PM Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org To: www-ws-desc@w3.org cc: "'Sanjiva Weerawarana'" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> Subject: Conflicts of WSDL schemas Hi all, I got the below inqury from a colleague. To my knowledge, http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/ is the target namespace defined by A4.1, and the two should be the same. Seems they have fell out of sync. Does anybody know what's going on here? Which one is the "valid" WSDL1.1 schema? or Am I missing anything here? Regards, Kevin >>> Up to now I always used the specification I found under http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl. In this document there is also an XML-Schema for WSDL, that can be found in A 4.1. Now I cam across another XML-Schema for WSDL under http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/. Unfortuantely, this schema looks very much different. A closer look shows that both schemas are incompatible. Indeed, both specifications allow to add self-defined subelements as child-elements of the root-element <wsdl:definitions>. However, according to the first schema this has to be placed at the end of the document (behind elements like <wsdl:message>). This is shown in the definition of the complexType definitionsType. This comes also clear from the template shown in 2.1, as there we have the <-- extensibility element --> * at the end of the document. However, when you analyze the second schema the extensibility elements have to be placed at the beginning. Indeed, the complexType tDefinitions is an extension of tExtensibleDocumented. tExtensibleDocumented declares the extensibility elements and tDefinitions adds the concrete wsdl-elements. Hence, the extensibility elements have to come first. Do you know anything about this? Can you tell me, which definition is valid?
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2002 20:42:42 UTC