Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150

I'm confused .. I thought we're talking about special values to
assign to the operation/(input|output)/@element attribute to
indicate any content (#any) or no content (#empty). 

What does this have to do with changing the name of the attribute?

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
To: "Tom Jordahl" <tomj@macromedia.com>; "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:43 AM
Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150


Have you implemented it already? ;-)
 
Gudge
 
P.S. I've always thought it mildly amusing to have an attribute whose
name is element ( or vice versa ) ;-)


________________________________

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Jordahl
Sent: 16 March 2004 11:01
To: 'Arthur Ryman'
Cc: 'WS Description List'
Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150





We just changed the name of this attribute to "element".

-1 to changing it AGAIN.



--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development

-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Ryman [mailto:ryman@ca.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 1:05 PM
To: Tom Jordahl
Cc: 'Jonathan Marsh'; 'WS Description List';
www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150




Correction to my note: 

s/elementReference/element/ 

Same comment applies. It's not an element anymore. 

Arthur Ryman,
Rational Desktop Tools Development

phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063
intranet: http://w3.torolab.ibm.com/DEAB/ 



Tom Jordahl <tomj@macromedia.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 

03/16/2004 09:30 AM 

To

"'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'WS Description List'"
<www-ws-desc@w3.org> 

cc

 

Subject

RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150

 

 

 




  
Jonathan, 
  
You meant to say "elementReference is the name of a type so it
would NOT appear in the syntax" 
  
Right? 
  

--
Tom Jordahl
Macromedia Server Development 
-----Original Message-----
From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 4:48 PM
To: WS Description List
Subject: RE: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 
  
elementReference is the name of a type so it would appear in the
syntax.  I like messageBody better too.  Or I suppose we could just get
rid of the reference altogether, right? 
  
<xs:attribute name="element" > 
       <xs:simpleType> 
               <xs:union memberTypes="xs:QName"> 
                       <xs:simpleType> 
                               <xs:restriction base="xs:token"> 
                                       <xs:enumeration
value="#any" /> 
                                       <xs:enumeration
value="#empty" /> 
                               </xs:restriction> 
                       </xs:simpleType> 
               </xs:union> 
       </xs:simpleType> 
</xs:attribute> 
  
  
  




________________________________



From: Arthur Ryman [mailto:ryman@ca.ibm.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 12:58 PM
To: Sanjiva Weerawarana
Cc: Jacek Kopecky; Jonathan Marsh; WS Description List;
www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150 
  

Sanjiva, 

The XML Schema looks fine except for a couple of minor errors.
Here's a corrected version: 

       <xs:attribute name="element" type="elementReference" /> 

       <xs:simpleType name="elementReference"> 
               <xs:union memberTypes="xs:QName"> 
                       <xs:simpleType> 
                               <xs:restriction base="xs:token"> 
                                       <xs:enumeration
value="#any" /> 
                                       <xs:enumeration
value="#empty" /> 
                               </xs:restriction> 
                       </xs:simpleType> 
               </xs:union> 
       </xs:simpleType> 


However, I dislike the name of the attribute, elementReference,
since the whole point of introducing it was to allow the case where
there is no element reference. How about @messageBody or @bodyContent
instead? 

Arthur Ryman,
Rational Desktop Tools Development

phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063
intranet: http://w3.torolab.ibm.com/DEAB/ 

"Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 

03/11/2004 10:50 PM 

 

To

"Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>, "Jonathan Marsh"
<jmarsh@microsoft.com> 

cc

"WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org> 

Subject

Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150


  

 

  

 






Looks good to me too .. however I'll let Arthur indicate an IBM
position as I can barely spell schiema let alone make value
judgements about the goodness of using unions.

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>
To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Cc: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: Proposed resolutions for issues 146 and 150


>
> I applaud the elegance of this proposal. 8-)
> I hope it will be accepted.
>
> Jacek
>
> On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 18:55, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> > Issues 146 [.1] and 150 [.2] were inadvertently left off the
FTF agenda.
> > Sorry my bad.  Here's a simple proposal for addressing these
issues,
> > assuming we find merit in adding this functionality.
> >
> > Issue 146 Should WSDL be able to describe an operation with
*anything*
> > in the message? [.1]
> >
> > Issue 150 Indicating empty bodies [.2]
> >
> > When using XML SchemaS, The element attribute points to a
QName of a
> > GED, preventing either empty bodies, or unconstrained
content.  Special
> > values of the element attribute could indicate these
conditions.
> >
> > Status quo:
> >   <xs:attribute name="element" type="xs:QName"
use="optional" />
> >
> > Proposal:
> >   <xs:attribute name="element" type="elementReference"
use="optional" />
> >
> >   <xs:simpleType name="elementReference">
> >     <xs:union>
> >       <xs:simpleType memberTypes="xs:QName">
> >         <xs:restriction base="xs:token">
> >           <xs:enumeration value="#any"/>
> >           <xs:enumeration value="#empty"/>
> >         </xs:restriction>
> >       </xs:simpleType>
> >     </xs:union>
> >   </xs:simpleType>
> >
> > (I hope I have got that syntax right.  Should be enough to
spark
> > discussion anyway...)
> >
> > [.1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x146
> > [.2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x150
> >

Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2004 22:03:44 UTC