- From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 15:39:14 -0400
- To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Arthur Ryman" <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org, www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF87FAB8D1.568888B7-ON85257188.00685976-85257188.006BFEC9@ca.ibm.com>
Jonathan, Yes, I think the spec needs clarification and I made a proposal in responce to Jacek [1]. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Jun/0034.html 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 "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 06/09/2006 02:34 PM To "Arthur Ryman" <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org> cc Subject RE: Extensions and Import/Include 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 19:40:06 UTC