Re: "recursive" interface inheritance

I would think that we should disallow circular inheritance like
what you indicate. I believe the wording was put into support
"diamond" inheritance where are single interface inherits the
same super interface via two or more inheritance paths.

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 1:12 AM
Subject: "recursive" interface inheritance


>
> Hi all,
>
> The current editor draft of part 1 spec [1] reads like that extensions can
be layered, but it doesn't say anything about if an interface can appear
multiple times in the inheritance hierarchy, for example,  is it legal for
interface A to extend interface B and C, while B extends A,  C extends B,
> and so on? For lack of good terms, I call it "recursive" inheritance.
>
> We did discuss how to handle operation name conflicts, and added the
following rule: " In cases where, due to a interface extending one or more
other interfaces, two or more interface operation components have the same
value for their {name} and {target namespace} properties, then the component
> models of those interface operation components MUST be equivalent (see
2.15 Equivalence of components)If the interface operation components are
equivalent then they are considered to collapse into a single component. It
is an error if two interface operation components have the same value for
their
> {name} and {target namespace} properties but are not equivalent".
>
> "recursive" inheritance may be considered as a special situation for
operation name conflicts.  But I don't think it's the intention of this
group to allow "recursive" inheritance. If the group agree, It would be
helpful to make it explicit in the spec:
> -  layered extension should be allowed
> - "recursive" inheritance should be disallowed.
>
> [1]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl12/wsdl12.html#Interfac
e
>
> Best Regards,
> Kevin

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 15:18:50 UTC