Re: problem with pattern attribute definition?

Amy,

I agree this is a problem. If an AII is REQUIRED, it MUST be present in 
the XML document. Therefore, the following statement is inconsistent:

The actual value of the pattern attribute information item; otherwise 
'http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/wsdl/in-out'. 

I recall at one point in time we discussed having a default value. 
However, these spec doesn't seem to indicate that we went that way.

To resolve this, either
1) remove the otherwise clause
2) or, define the default and make the attribute OPTIONAL

The component model propery is REQUIRED in either case.

Arthur Ryman,
IBM Software Group, Rational Division

blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
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



Amelia A Lewis <alewis@tibco.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
12/07/2006 01:35 PM

To
www-ws-desc@w3.org
cc

Subject
problem with pattern attribute definition?







Heylas,

So, the pattern AII is REQUIRED (2.4.2 ed copy, bullet 3).  But if it 
*doesn't exist*, we supply a default value (2.4.2.2, final sentence).

If that's the way that we always describe defaults (required attribute, 
which if it isn't there has a value anyway), then our description is 
really painfully awkward.  Is this a consequence of describing the "XML 
representation" via the infoset?  Is it boneheaded of me to think that if 
I see "the pattern attribute information item is required" that @pattern 
will always appear on operation?

Heh.  Can XPath retrieve the value of a defaulted attribute?  That's not 
apropos of much of anything, mind.

Amy!
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Senior Architect
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com