Re: CR045: Inline schemas with no target namespace

Sorry Gurus,
I just hit a "Reply" instead of a "Reply All'.

rgds,
Ram

On 6/9/06, Ramkumar Menon <ramkumar.menon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi Paul,
> Thanks for looking into the issue.
>
> > But I get your drift - what is the benefit for this assertion?
> > Can we relax it based upon this new knowledge?
>
>  I feel the same. The assertion could be relaxed and an alternative
> assertion cd be made that any type description components that are
> accessed/referred to within the wsdl component model should exist in a
> non-null target namespace. [ i.e. namespace name is not null].
> Do let me know if this is agreeable.
>
> rgds,
> Ram
>
>
>  On 6/8/06, paul.downey@bt.com <paul.downey@bt.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > this was recorded as CR045, and I took an action on today's
> > telcon to try and make some progress
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/#CR045
> >
> > > Menon wrote:
> > > Section 3.1.2.1 of the Core Langage spec says
> > > "WSDL 2.0 modifies the XML Schema definition of the xs:schema element
> > > information item to make this attribute information item required".
> >
> > So it's assertion #Schema-0019-summary which is the issue here:
> >
> > "The xs:schema element information item MUST contain a targetNamespace
> > attribute information item.†"
> >
> > > There is a scenario where I have an existing XSD that I am intending
> > > to re-use while designing the WSDL. The XSD has no target namespace,
> > > and has a bunch of elements and attributes defined within it. What it
> > > also does is to import a couple of XSDs that have a non-null target
> > > namespace. the wsdl intends to define the message parts to point to
> > > one of the nodes defined in the imported XSDs within the nonamespace
> > > XSD.
> > > The nodes that had been directly defined in the no-namespace XSD
> > > are not used by the WSDL, but are consumed by other applications.
> >
> > So the Global Element Declaration (GED) you'd like to reference
> > has a qname, but is imported by a schema with no-namespace.
> >
> > > I was wondering that atleast
> > > theoretically, this should be possible. The question is - "Do we need
> > > to make some statements around this in the spec" ?
> >
> > > Arthur wrote:
> > > Just the immediate childen of the wsdl:types element need a namespace.
> > > Within those you can include or import a no-namespace schema.
> >
> > xs:include isn't going to help here, as the components in the
> > no-namespace schema will take on the namespace of the includer,
> > chameleon style.
> >
> > You could create a wrapper schema with a targetNamespace
> > and then xs:import a no-namespace schema from outside the WSDL:
> >
> >    <xs:schema targetNamespace="http://example.com/dev/null">
> >      <xs:import schemaLocation" no-namespace.xsd"/>
> >    </xs:schema>
> >
> > But then the no-namspace schema is no longer inlined.
> >
> > > [snippit]
> > > In this case, do yo think that it would be "really" invalid to inline
> > > such an XSD into the WSDL ?
> >
> > Well with the targetNamespace required assertion, yes :-)
> > But I get your drift - what is the benefit for this assertion?
> > Can we relax it based upon this new knowledge?
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Shift to the left, shift to the right!
> Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!
>
> -Ramkumar Menon
> A typical Macroprocessor
>



-- 
Shift to the left, shift to the right!
Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!

-Ramkumar Menon
A typical Macroprocessor