- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:01:47 -0700
- To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Given that wsdl 1.1 doesn't preclude the wsdl 2.0 components, would it be possible to "cast" a subset of WSDL 1.1 constructs into the WSDL 2.0 component model via include/import? I realize that "cast" is the rat hole, but is it even technically feasible? Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Martin Gudgin > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 7:59 PM > To: Sanjiva Weerawarana; Amelia A Lewis > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: RE: Idle question > > > The xs:import element does two things. > > 1. It signals that the schema containing the import uses components > from a namespace other than the target namespace of the containing > schema. > 2. If there is a schemaLocation, it indicates where one can > retrieve a resource containing such components. > > Regarding the latter, the result of retrieving such a resource on the > WWW must be an xs:schema element (although there is no requirement that > the root element of the retrieved resource be an xs:schema ). See > section 4.3 of Schema Part 1[1] > > xs:include is similar. > > To me, if I wsdl20:include or wsdl20:import a resource that does not > result in a wsdl20:definitions element (either as the root element or > such an element identified by fragid ) then at best I get no components > and at worst it's an error. > > Gudge > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#composition-instance > s > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org > > [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sanjiva Weerawarana > > Sent: 26 October 2004 21:35 > > To: Amelia A Lewis > > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org > > Subject: Re: Idle question > > > > > > OK what I meant is this: If we do *nothing extra* then the wsdl11 > > namespace will not be recognized as WSDL by a WSDL 2.0 processor. > > Thus any WSDL 1.1 element that's placed in a WSDL 2.0 document > > will be just an extension element. > > > > If someone attempts to import WSDL 1.1 (or XSD or YourML or MyML) > > stuff via wsdl20:import then it will fail as we have specifically > > defined import semantics at the component model level and there > > are no WSDL 2.0 components there. > > > > If someone attempts to include I guess the same thing will occur, > > but I have to read that part again to see what we say precisely. > > > > Gudge, you did worked on most of the import/include stuff - do > > you agree? > > > > Amy, does this make sense? I also do not want to support WSDL 1.1 > > import/include - it simply doesn't make sense as we'd have to > > define an equivalence relation to make it go. ARGH! More work!! > > > > Sanjiva. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com> > > To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> > > Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 12:48 AM > > Subject: Re: Idle question > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand that answer. > > > > > > I'm working on implementation, and one of the areas of > > implementation is > > > import (and include; *sigh* that include was included). It > > is natural > > > enough that WSDL 1.1 cannot import WSDL 2.0. Is it true > > that WSDL 2.0 > > > cannot import or include WSDL 1.1? This seems a painful limitation > > > (although it makes the work go faster). If it *can*, what are the > > > semantics of the included components? > > > > > > It would probably be enough to say "WSDL 2.0 documents > > cannot import or > > > include WSDL 1.1 documents" to clarify the situation. I > > *do* think we > > > need a clarification, though, because as it stands, the > > import/include > > > descriptions talk about including WSDL, not just WSDL 2.0. > > > > > > Amy! > > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:11:37 +0600 > > > Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > You can of course import it but since those elems would simply be > > > > extension elements ... > > > > > > > > Sanjiva. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com> > > > > To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 9:47 PM > > > > Subject: Idle question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Heylas, > > > > > > > > > > So, can a WSDL 2.0 document import or include a WSDL > > 1.1 document? > > > > > > > > > > Presumably, 1.1 cannot import 2.0. > > > > > > > > > > Amy! > > > > > -- > > > > > Amelia A. Lewis > > > > > Senior Architect > > > > > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc. > > > > > alewis@tibco.com > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Amelia A. Lewis > > > Senior Architect > > > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc. > > > alewis@tibco.com > > > >
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2004 19:01:50 UTC