- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 11:48:00 -0700
- To: <paul.downey@bt.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
I thought you didn't like using an string for identifying a (minor) version? I'd still love to see having a version attribute on the wsdl definitions in scope for wsdl 2.0, but I haven't seen any folks change their mind on that issue. 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: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 5:25 AM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: [xml-dev] schema versioning and RDDL > > > > forwarded on from XML-DEV mailing list: an interesting idea for > describing versions of a namespace in an external RDDL document. > > Paul > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nikita Ogievetsky [mailto:nogievet@cogx.com] > Sent: 02 May 2004 23:51 > To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org > Subject: [xml-dev] schema versioning and RDDL > > > Dear All, > > I started to look at the applications of using namespace URI > for schema > versioning [1], [2] and RDDL [3]; and was wondering if > anybody can give > any thoughts (or had already given) to the pros and cons of > this approach. > > The idea is to use "#" separator for namespace versioning > (not "/" as proposed in the referenced resources), i.g: > > <myObj xmlns="http://www.cogx.com/myObject#v1.0"> > <myProp1 value="x"> > </myObj> > <myObj xmlns="http://www.cogx.com/myObject#v1.2"> > <myProp1 value="x"> > <myProp2 href="http://www. cogx.com"> > </myObj> > > Than an RDDL document at the http://www.cogx.com/myObject location can > contain the following RDDL resource elements > with ids "v1.0" and "v1.2" correspondingly: > > <xhtml xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" > xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" > xmlns:rddl="http://www.rddl.org/"> > <head> > <title>RDDL Resources for myObject </title> > </head> > <body> > <h1>RDDL Resources for myObject</h1> > <p> > Here we are describing myObject, > How it came about, > Its relationships to other objects, > its history, details, > and other related information > that can be useful for modelers and developers. > </p> > ... > <rddl:resource > id="v1.0" > xlink:href="http://www.cogx.com/myobject/myobject20040401.xsd" > xlink:title="Version 1.0 of myObject schema, approved on > April 1, 2004" > xlink:role="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" > xlink:arcrole="http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation" > > > <rddl:resource > id="v1.2" > xlink:href="http://www.cogx.com/myobject/myobject20040421.xsd" > xlink:title="Version 1.2 of myObject schema, approved on > April 21, 2004" > xlink:role="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" > xlink:arcrole="http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation" > > > ... > </body> > </xhtml> > > This way information about all versions of myObject can be > collocated in one > RDDL document. > > Does it make sense? > --Nikita > > [1] http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200103/msg00995.html > [2] http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-tipnamsp.html > [3] http://www.rddl.org > >
Received on Monday, 17 May 2004 14:48:03 UTC