'ad:mustUnderstand', Schema Annotation Element? (was RE: Few more (significant) edits

Glen,

> bright side, it simplifies the schema for the 
> example "isGoldClubMember" element:
>    <element name="isGoldClubMember"
>             type="xs:boolean"
>             ad:mustUnderstand="true"/>

'ad:mustUnderstand' is an out-of-band attribute. AFAIK, this attribute is
unreachable (via element declaration component). I raised this issue on June
29th [1]. And, you addressed my concern:

"Glen: I think a decorator on the schema is a great way to do it, just like
we did with the acceptedMediaTypes designator." [2]

Given these, may I request you to re-purpose 'ad:mustUnderstand' as an
annotation element? Similar to xmlmime:expectedMediaType element [3].

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0281.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0285.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jun/0285.html

Regards,
Asir S Vedamuthu
asirv at webmethods dot com
http://www.webmethods.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Glen Daniels
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:08 PM
To: Amelia A Lewis; www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Few more (significant) edits




Just taking another scan through part 2, and noticed I missed some major
stuff (sorry!):

* Missed this before - section 3.1.4 (the AD Module) should actually be
promoted to section 3.2, with appropriate promoting of subsections.
It's a separate component, not a sub-component (although the module does
implement the feature, this should be indicated in the text for the
module, not by structural inclusion).

* We decided to accept the abstract ad:mustUnderstand attribute on the
schema instead of using the soap-specific one.  This change was never
actually made to the proposal!  This requires some surgery.  On the
bright side, it simplifies the schema for the example "isGoldClubMember"
element:

    <element name="isGoldClubMember"
             type="xs:boolean"
             ad:mustUnderstand="true"/>

I can do this in a number of ways.  1) I can write you the text, 2) you
can hand me the XML and I'll edit and hand back to you, 3) you can sign
me up as a part 2 editor and I could edit it in CVS.  I'm OK with any of
those, let me know.

* "as defined in the Application Data feature" (what is currently sec
3.1.4.2), the words "Application Data feature" should link to section
3.2.

* Other places in the document single-quote URIs.  I would suggest doing
the same for the feature/property URIs in section 3.  In fact, I think
it might look better if we actually  bolded or italicized these URIs -
is there any precedent for that?

Thanks,
--Glen

Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 08:23:34 UTC