- From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:45:06 -0500
- To: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFE12A111D.9410A5D9-ON85256FD4.0059FCC8-85256FD4.005C0293@ca.ibm.com>
Paul, I think I'd like to rephrase this proposal to remove any reference to a processor since we agreed to take processors out ot the spec. We can phrase this in terms of document validity as follows: "All inline schemas that are contained in a WSDL document and any other WSDL documents that it directly or indirectly imports or includes MUST be used when resolving QName references to elements or types that belong to namespaces that are imported via xs:import elements that have no schemaLocation attribute." 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, text: 4169395063@fido.ca intranet: http://labweb.torolab.ibm.com/DRY6/ <paul.downey@bt.com> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 03/30/2005 06:58 AM To Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <www-ws-desc@w3.org> cc Subject RE: Is schemaLocation Required When Importing Inline Schemas? Arthur wrote: > "If schemaLocation is not present then a WSDL processor > MUST attempt to locate the schema among the inline schemas > it has encountered while processing the WSDL document." i do recall how deep the discussion went regarding the WSDL WG's ability to define how a schema processor should operate, even in this high level context, and there were one or two edge cases. However, this is a common sense approach given it matches how most WSDL 1.1 implementations work, and therefore likely to simplify the migration of a description from WSDL 1.1 to WSDL 2.0, so +1. Paul
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2005 16:45:19 UTC