- From: Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
- Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 11:46:44 -0700
- To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
You just mentioned the word! :-) Building a component model is a function of a WSDL document and a set of extensions. Thanks, Roberto Jonathan Marsh wrote: > This is a good answer to my concern. Thanks for thinking this through > so clearly! > > Do you think we need to state in the spec that building a component > model is a function of the WSDL provided, plus the set of extensions the > processor understands, without mentioning the dreaded "processor" word? > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] > On >> Behalf Of Arthur Ryman >> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:00 AM >> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org >> Subject: Extensions and Import/Include >> >> >> I've had further thoughts on the interaction between extensions and >> the import/include mechanism. Jonathan asked if the WS-A extension >> would violate my proposed restrictions. I don' t think is does because >> of the recent "clarifications" about how extensions work. >> >> I had assumed that the presence of an extension was triggered by the >> content of a document. This is wrong since we agreed that an extension >> was in effect whether or not a document actually contained any markup >> from it's namespace. For example, if you claim that a component model >> conforms to the wsdlx extension then ALL operations have a {safety} >> property whether or the wsdlx:safe attribute is present. >> >> Therefore it is fine for WS-A to add properties to components even if >> there is no markup in those components (e.g. Interface components). >> This doesn't violate the import/include restriction because you get >> the same properties added whether or not a component is brought in via >> import/include or is defined in the document. The extension is present >> globally and uniformly throughout the component model. A processor can >> therefore read (and optionally cache) each document exactly once and >> then assemble them into the full component model instance. >> >> This implies that we can't just talk about component models. We have >> to talk about extended component models, i.e. the core component model >> plus a set of extensions. The presence of extensions is independent of >> the document content and therefore we have to specify which extensions >> are present when we consider the validity of a component model >> instance. >> >> -- Arthur
Received on Friday, 9 June 2006 18:47:02 UTC