- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 07:23:19 -0700
- To: <paul.downey@bt.com>, <umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com>, <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
The BP is defined over WSDL 1.1, and it's true that in WSDL 1.1 the schema processing rules are unclear. I think WSDL 2.0 is much clearer in this regard and see no real reason to prohibit references across in-line schemas. Gudge > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of paul.downey@bt.com > Sent: 19 October 2003 08:57 > To: umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com; ryman@ca.ibm.com > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: RE: Can one inline schema import definitions from a > second inline schema? > > Ümit wrote: > > I would rather see inlined schemas to > dissappear altogether from WSDL. Instead of discussing the > semantics and the interpretation of inlined schemas within > WSDL, the problem can be left to Schema completely. > > > I've thus far found stand-alone WSDLs very useful, but if the > rules are unclear how to reference between in-line schemas, > and the BP effectively prohibits it, then I agree: we should > consider removing inline schemas from WSDL. > > Paul > > > >
Received on Sunday, 19 October 2003 10:24:53 UTC