RE: Review of WS-A WSDL Binding

Jonathan,

I'll implement #3.

I think we could make some editorial improvements re #2. I'm glad the 
intension of the spec is to allow reference to <description> elements, but 
if I as an editor forgot that, then maybe the text is unclear.  Normally, 
when the term "document" is used, it means a complete XML document rooted 
at the "document element".  I looked at the spec and I can't see where we 
define WSDL 2.0 document to be a description element. I suggest we revise 
the spec so that wherever we allow an IRI to a WSDL 2.0 document we change 
it as follows:

"The IRI is the location of a WSDL 2.0 document or a <description> element 
information items within an XML document."

Perhaps put this text in chapter 7 [1] and refer to it from elsewhere in 
the spec.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-wsdl20-20060106/#wsdllocation

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
02/28/2006 06:07 AM

To
Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
cc

Subject
RE: Review of WS-A WSDL Binding






Thanks for the review!  The WG discussed these as indicated below:
 

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On 
Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 7:59 PM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Review of WS-A WSDL Binding
 

As per my action item, here are my comments on [1]. 

1. Section 2 introduces some elements, <wsaw:InterfaceName>, 
<wsaw:ServiceName> for refering to WSDL Interface, Service, and Endpoint 
components. The same result could be achieved by using the IRI-reference 
component designators defined in WSDL 2.0 Part 1, Appendix A. 

These elements have to refer to WSDL 1.1 constructs as well, this and 
other reasons (e.g. difficult syntax) we did not have consensus to 
recommend to the WS-A WG that they should consider component designators.
 

2. Section 2 also defines the use of embedding WSDL in <wsa:Metadata> 
which indicates that people think it's useful to embed WSDL in other XML 
documents. This raises a question about WSDL 2.0. In <include>, <import>, 
and @wsdlLocation a location is specified. The spec says this location 
should dereference to a WSDL 2.0 document. Should it also be allowed to 
derefence to an element in an XML document, e.g. via a fragment id? This 
is the case for XML Schema. 

We recall we defined ?WSDL 2.0 document? specifically as a 
<wsdl20:description> element, which should enable fragment ids to work. If 
you think this is no longer the case we should raise it as an issue.
 

3. Section 3.1 defines the <wsaw:UsingAddressing> Extension Element. I 
have a question about terminology. Our spec is inconsistent. Sometimes we 
say Extensibility element and sometimes Extension element. I suggest we 
use Extension element and attribute throughout, rather than Extensibility. 
 I think this is purely editorial. I'll make the change if no one objects. 


Agreed.
 

4. The XML example 4-1 is wrong since it uses <definition> as the root 
element. It should use <description> 

Will forward.

5. Section 4.3 defines the use of <wsa:ReferenceParameters> but does not 
say how this affects the WSDL 2.0 component model. Does this add a 
property to Endpoint? 

Will forward.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20060216/ 

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