RE: Question Regarding Top Level Global Extensors

Adi, as you may know, during the 3 July telecon [.1] the WG decided to
replace substitution groups with an open content model. During the 17
and 24 July telecons [.2, .3], the WG finalized some related details.
These changes should be reflected in the next published draft.

 

--Jeff

 

[.1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jul/0041.html 

[.2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jul/0121.html 

[.3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Jul/0139.html

 

________________________________

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Sakala, Adinarayana
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 8:36 AM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Question Regarding Top Level Global Extensors

 

Hi all,

 

I am looking at the current draft of spec[1] in the context of
extensiblity elements as children of wsdl:definitions element.

I see globalExt, preTypes and postTypes, this means we cant define
extensibility elements at the end of the definitions (i.e post
wsdl:service element).

we have provided this kind of flexbility to have extensibility elements
pre and post extensors in all other elements but (i.e wsdl:binding,
wsdl:service etc).

 

If we have to be consistent i think it is a good idea to allow
postServiceExt for wsdl:definitions.

 

Adi Sakala

 

[1] -
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl12/wsdl12.html#lang
uage-extensibility