Re: WSDL 2.0 element order enforcement in schema

Amelia A Lewis wrote:
> Hmmm.  I'd recommend that we document this in our schema, including
> text to the effect:
> 
> The content model of the documentation element as represented in schema
> is not complete.  Validators MUST implement the constraints as
> specified in [specref], which permits extension elements in more
> locations than we can show in a schema that abides by the UPA
> constraint.

I've got an action to implement this and I find the text confusing.

Did you really mean the *wsdl:documentation* element or was it the
*wsdl:description* element whose content model is not complete?

Furthermore, is it true that the spec permits extension elements in
more locations than the schema does? Perhaps it depends on what
you mean by "location". It seems to me that being schema-valid is
necessary but not sufficient in order for a document to be spec-valid.
It follows that the spec cannot "permit more" than the schema does,
doesn't it? Maybe by "more locations" you meant that in 2.1.2 [1]
the buckets identified by the last bullet of (2) and the last bullet
of (4) respectively are indistinguishable when the wsdl:types element
is not present?

One last point. In the proposed text I see a MUST requirement on
something called a "validator". Isn't that tantamount to reintroducing
the concept of "WSDL processor"?

[1]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html#Description_XMLRep

Thanks,
Roberto

Received on Saturday, 16 July 2005 00:42:24 UTC