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

RE: Extensions

From: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:36:25 -0700
Message-ID: <2E33960095B58E40A4D3345AB9F65EC1075EA079@win-msg-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
I too am concerned about the complexity of the proposal; the table just
calls out all the possible situations, and if we're going to define an
optional global EII, an optional AII within that EII, and an optional
AII that may be attached to other EII's, then we're going to have to
specify what happens in all the cases.

Does the convenience of a global EII outweigh the complexity of having
to specify how / when it overrides a local AII? 


-----Original Message-----
From: Sedukhin, Igor [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:14 AM
To: Sanjiva Weerawarana; Jeffrey Schlimmer; WS-Desc WG (Public)
Subject: RE: Extensions


>>If needed we can put an ed note in the working draft saying we're
considering adding more flexibility and see whether we get feedback
asking for it.

By the time we get feedback, it may be too late to make it flexible. By
then all WSDL processors will already be implementing logic that we have
spec'ed out.

I'm also concerned by the complexity of Jeffrey's wordings. May be, at
the initial stages of defining extensions we can get a simple
explanation of what it means before we get into formal specifications. I
suggest adding this clause:

"When declaring an extension (explicit), all its elements that appear in
the WSDL document are by default required for understanding by WSDL
processors (i.e. wsdl:required = true). Optional extensions do not have
to be declared (implicit) or may be declared specifying wsdl:required =
An extension element may override wsdl:required attribute, in which case
the element is required or not regardless of the extension declaration.
By default an extension element does not override the wsdl:required
attrubute and rules apply according to the extension declaration
(explicit or implicit)."

It does not sound very complex (to me :) and WSDL processor
implementations may easily take it into account.

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788

-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 11:42 PM
To: Jeffrey Schlimmer; WS-Desc WG (Public)
Subject: Re: Extensions

Hi Jeffrey,

Your table has too many cells for my liking! It looks like an interop
nightmare is being created ..

Why don't we go with the simpler model ala WSDL 1.1 for requiredness?
You get per-element "gotta have it" capability and that's it. If needed
we can put an ed note in the working draft saying we're considering
adding more flexibility and see whether we get feedback asking for it.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
To: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 4:57 AM
Subject: Extensions

Roberto, thank you for patiently explaining the current proposal during
the teleconference this morning.

Just to make sure I understand the proposal, can it be accurately
restated as?


A WSDL parser MUST recognize a foreign EII if and only if one of the
following is true:

(a) The foreign EII has a wsdl:required AII that is true, or

(b) The foreign EII namespace is declared with a wsdl:extension EII,
that EII has a wsdl:required AII that is true, and the foreign EII does
not have a wsdl:required AII.


(a) is what we have in WSDL 1.1 today. (b) adds the global declaration
but allows a wsdl:required AII on the foreign element to override the
global declaration.

Attached is a table that I crunched down to the two rules above.

For completeness, let's allow AII extensions via (something like)
<xs:anyAttribute namespace="#other" processContents="#lax"/>.

Of course, because the wsdl:required AII cannot be attached to a
(foreign) AII, only the global setting in the wsdl:extension EII can be
used to indicate whether a WSDL parser MUST or MAY recognize such an

Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 12:37:02 UTC

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