Re: Version attribute for WSDL

If we're not telling people what it means anyway, I don't understand why we
would want to do this.  If it's an extensibility point, we've already got
that and people are free to use new attributes and elements all over the
place.  If it's meant to be something more specific, specify it and, as
Roberto says, add it to the component model.  I mean, why not a "foo"
attribute with "no semantics" too?

As has been noted, versioning "compatibly" is hard.  We already have
namespaces to do versioning in the large, and developers are free to version
their own stuff without changing URIs, if they accept the consequences.  I
guess I'd still prefer we not do anything in this area.

--Glen

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 3:41 PM
Subject: RE: Version attribute for WSDL


>
>
> David,
>
> We wouldn't say anything like this about the version attribute.
>      "..it has no semantics.."
>
> So David can tell his WSDL consumers that he uses this attribute to
indicate
> compatible versions of the same WSDL file.  And I can tell my users that
> version 1 does not equal version 2.  But as WSDL spec authors we don't
have
> to take a stand on how this is done.
>
> Isn't that nice?  We don't have to fight about what it means.
>
> --
> Tom Jordahl
> Macromedia Server Development
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 2:32 PM
> To: paul.downey@bt.com; vbp@hp.com; tomj@macromedia.com;
www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Version attribute for WSDL
>
> I'm interested in the version attribute for identifying versions within
> "compatible" definitions.  I would like to have our spec say explicitly
> that.  I am strongly strongly opposed to using a version attribute for
> identifying different incompatible versions.  That's what namespaces and
> URIs are for.
>
> Some off-the-cuff suggestions for the wording:
>
> "The version attribute identifies a particular version of the definitions,
> that is compatible with all other versions with the same targetnamespace.
> It SHOULD not be used to identify incompatible definition versions."
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of paul.downey@bt.com
> > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 9:02 AM
> > To: vbp@hp.com; tomj@macromedia.com; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Version attribute for WSDL
> >
> >
> >
> > I believe the version value is useful information for when the
> > interface has been compatibly changed within the same namespace.
> >
> > +1 Tom's proposal, i can't see any harm and it could be useful
> > as a building block for a mechanism for relating an interface
> > version to other versions, akin to the 'previous', 'this' and
> > 'latest' version URLs on W3C publications.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Vambenepe, William N
> > Sent: 12 February 2004 16:53
> > To: Tom Jordahl; www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Version attribute for WSDL
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Tom for the proposal. I could live with this attribute on
> > <definitions> but I really don't like it on <interface>. As Glen
> > eloquently explained at the F2F, a different interface should use a
> > different QName. What does it mean for a binding to reference an
> > interface if there are dozens of "versions" of this interface. Can I
> > have a binding for only a certain version of an interface? I know we
> > don't have to answer this since we "define no semantic" but
> > that doesn't
> > make the problem go away.
> >
> > William
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Jordahl
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 6:13 AM
> > > To: 'www-ws-desc@w3.org'
> > > Subject: Version attribute for WSDL
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In fulfillment of my action item received at the January F2F,
> > > here is a
> > > proposal to add a version attribute to WSDL to aid in the
> > > versioning of WSDL
> > > documents and interfaces.
> > >
> > > I propose that an attribute with the name "version" be added to the
> > > <definitions> element of WSDL.  This attribute is for user
> > > convenience, and
> > > the specification would define no semantics for it,
> > > specifically the value
> > > of this attribute would NOT be included in the infoset.
> > > However, it is
> > > expected that WSDL authors and consumers can use this
> > attribute, when
> > > present, to differentiate between different revisions of a
> > > WSDL document.
> > >
> > > Example:
> > >
> > > <definitions version="1" targetNamespace=http://sample.org/>
> > > ...
> > > </definitions>
> > >
> > > This proposal is modeled after the version attribute of XML
> > > Schema, see
> > > section 3.15.2 in Part 1 of the XML Schema specification:
> > >   http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#Schemas
> > >
> > > In our specification, section 2.1.2 would be updated to
> > > include the new
> > > attribute:
> > >
> > > 2.1.2 XML Representation of Definitions Component
> > >
> > > <definitions
> > >       targetNamespace="xs:anyURI"
> > >       version = "xs:token"? >
> > >   <documentation />?
> > >   [ <import /> | <include /> ]*
> > >   <types />?
> > >   [ <interface /> | <binding /> | <service /> ]*
> > > </definitions>
> > >
> > >
> > > Additionally, I propose that a similar version attribute be
> > > added to the
> > > <interface> element of WSDL. This attribute would mirror the
> > > definitions
> > > attribute.  Again, this would be for user convenience, and
> > > the specification
> > > would define no semantics for it, specifically the value of
> > > this attribute
> > > would NOT be included in the infoset.  WSDL authors and
> > > consumers could use
> > > this attribute, when present, to differentiate between
> > > different revisions
> > > of an interface.  In particular, this would enable a consumer of the
> > > document to know explicitly when an interface they are using
> > > has changed.
> > >
> > > Example:
> > > <definitions>
> > >   <interface name="myInterface" version="alpha17">
> > >     ...
> > >   </interface>
> > > </definitions>
> > >
> > >
> > > 2.2.2 XML Representation of Interface Component
> > > <definitions>
> > >   <interface
> > >         name="xs:NCName"
> > >         extends="list of xs:QName"?
> > >         styleDefault="xs:anyURI"?
> > >         version = "xs:token"? >
> > >     <documentation />?
> > >     [ <operation /> | <feature /> | <property /> ]*
> > >   </interface>
> > > </definitions>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tom Jordahl
> > > Macromedia Server Development
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Received on Thursday, 12 February 2004 16:40:50 UTC