- From: Umit Yalcinalp <umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:13:38 -0700
- To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
- Message-ID: <3F9433E2.5080705@oracle.com>
Martin Gudgin wrote: >We're not saying anything about the way other people's specs work, that IS the way schema works: > >A imports B imports C > >Constructs in C are not visible to A > I guess what you are implying is that the way the Sample Apps xsd and wsdls are written today will need to be changed. The BP recommended pattern <wsdl:types><xsd:schema><xsd:import>.... is used by Sample Apps to incorporate the schemas. With the visibility rules as specified in our spec today, these will need to be rewritten as <wsdl:types><xs:import> to get the same visibility and to reuse the components. > >Gudge > > --umit > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org >>[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana >>Sent: 20 October 2003 18:27 >>To: www-ws-desc@w3.org >>Subject: Re: Can one inline schema import definitions from a >>second inline schema? >> >> >>Obviously I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. >>Why do we say that imported components are not available to >>WSDL? In general, why do we go saying things about other >>people's specs?? >> >>Also, isn't the replacement really >> <xs:schema><xs:include .../></xs:schema> ?? But then what >>do I know about schema. >> >>Sanjiva. >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com> >>To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; >><www-ws-desc@w3.org> >>Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 11:15 PM >>Subject: RE: Can one inline schema import definitions from a >>second inline schema? >> >> >> >> >>>Except that putting in <xs:schema><xs:import ... /> >>> >>> >></xs:schema> DOES >> >> >>>NOT >>> >>> >>make the imported constructs visible to WSDL ( we had this >>debate last year ) >> >> >>>Gudge >>> >>> >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org >>>>[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva >>>> >>>> >>Weerawarana >> >> >>>>Sent: 20 October 2003 18:11 >>>>To: www-ws-desc@w3.org >>>>Subject: Re: Can one inline schema import definitions >>>> >>>> >>from a second >> >> >>>>inline schema? >>>> >>>> >>>>We can avoid all this subtelty if we just say <types> can contain >>>>only one <xsd:schema>. I actually don't even like us allowing >>>><xsd:import> directly inside types - if you want that just put a >>>><xsd:schema> and an import inside it. >>>> >>>>Sanjiva. >>>> >>>>----- Original Message ----- >>>>From: "Amelia A. Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com> >>>>To: <paul.downey@bt.com> >>>>Cc: <mgudgin@microsoft.com>; <umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com>; >>>><ryman@ca.ibm.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org> >>>>Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:22 PM >>>>Subject: Re: Can one inline schema import definitions >>>> >>>> >>from a second >> >> >>>>inline schema? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Oops! >>>>> >>>>>That's an implication that I hadn't even thought of. You're >>>>>absolutely right; WS-I prohibits references between >>>>> >>>>> >>>>embedded schemas in this way. >>>> >>>> >>>>>I wonder if they knew that it had that effect? >>>>> >>>>>Amy! >>>>>On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:57:55 +0100 paul.downey@bt.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>it could be my mistake, but i understand R2004: >>>>>> >>>>>> <<[must not] import a Schema from any document whose >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>root element is >>>> >>>> >>>>>> not "schema" >> >>>>>> >>>>>>as prohibiting import of a namespace from one in-line schema >>>>>>into another in-line schema, since the root element of a WSDL >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>document is >>>> >>>> >>>>>>"definitions". >>>>>> >>>>>>As always, i'm prepared to be wrong .. in fact i'd like >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>to be wrong >>>> >>>> >>>>>>here: i'm responsible for several .NET generated WSDLs >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>that schema >>>> >>>> >>>>>>import namespaces between multiple in-line schemas using >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>a missing >>>> >>>> >>>>>>schemaLocation value. >>>>>> >>>>>>Paul >>>>>> >>>>>>[2004] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>http://ws-i.org/Profiles/Basic/2003-08/BasicProfile-1.0a.htm#r >>>> >>>> >>>efinement34101 >>> >>> >>>>304 >>>> >>>> >>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/rary >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>>From: Amelia A. Lewis [mailto:alewis@tibco.com] >>>>>>Sent: 20 October 2003 15:54 >>>>>>To: Downey,PS,Paul,XSJ67A C >>>>>>Cc: mgudgin@microsoft.com; umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com; >>>>>>ryman@ca.ibm.com; www-ws-desc@w3.org >>>>>>Subject: Re: Can one inline schema import definitions >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>from a second >>>> >>>> >>>>>>inline schema? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I don't understand. >>>>>> >>>>>>WS-I prohibited use of wsdl:import to import schema, and >>>>>>requires that xs:import be inside xs:schema inside wsdl:types >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>(bare xs:import >>>> >>>> >>>>>>inside wsdl:types is allowed in wsdl.next). It prohibits >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>use of any >>>> >>>> >>>>>>schema language other than W3C XML Schema, and prohibits >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>import of >>>> >>>> >>>>>>fragments (these from Anne Thomas Manes quotes of the >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>WS-I BP). I >>>> >>>> >>>>>>was not aware of a prohibition of imports of embedded >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>schema; could >>>> >>>> >>>>>>you cite or quote this requirement? >>>>>> >>>>>>Amy! >>>>>>On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:42:41 +0100 paul.downey@bt.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>I'm not sure I understand how is WSDL 2.0 clearer in >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>this regard >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>than WSDL 1.1 ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>My concern is unless the rules are absolutely clear >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>on how to >> >> >>>>>>>reference across in-line schemas, it will require profiling >>>>>>>out again in 2.0. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I assume the WS-I prohibited importing an in-line >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>schema namespace >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>because the 1.1 rules were unclear, not because of >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>some other >> >> >>>>>>>interoperability issue ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>>>From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:mgudgin@microsoft.com] >>>>>>>Sent: 19 October 2003 15:23 >>>>>>>To: Downey,PS,Paul,XSJ67A C; 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? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>Amelia A. Lewis >>>>>>Architect, TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc. >>>>>>alewis@tibco.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>Amelia A. Lewis >>>>>Architect, TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc. >>>>>alewis@tibco.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> > > > > -- Umit Yalcinalp Consulting Member of Technical Staff ORACLE Phone: +1 650 607 6154 Email: umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com
Received on Monday, 20 October 2003 15:13:44 UTC