- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 03:50:40 +0000
- To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4550 Summary: Is an assertion required for {http location} EBNF grammar? Product: WSDL Version: 2.0 Platform: All URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws- desc/2007May/0015.html OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Core AssignedTo: plh@w3.org ReportedBy: jonathan@wso2.com QAContact: www-ws-desc@w3.org I'd like to propose replacing the text associated with the EBNF grammar in section 6.8.1.1: "The following EBNF [ISO/IEC 14977:1966] grammar represents the patterns for constructing the request IRI" with the new assertion HTTPSerialization-2106: "The {http location} property MUST conform to the following EBNF [ISO/IEC 14977:1966] grammar, which represents the patterns for constructing the request IRI." regards, John Kaputin. On 5/4/07, John Kaputin (gmail) <jakaputin@gmail.com> wrote: > > There is no WSDL assertion stating that an {http location} or > whttp:location must conform to the EBNF grammar defined in Part 2 Section > 6.8.1.1. > > Consider the following whttp:location values, which do not conform to this > EBNF grammar: > > "/to}wn/{localname}" (unmatched left brace) > "/town/{local:name}" (template does not specify an NCName) > "/town/{localname" (closing right brace is missing) > > Should these be considered WSDL errors? If so, should there be an > assertion about the EBNF grammar? Apache Woden parses the whttp:location > attribute and if it does not conform to the EBNF grammar the {http location} > property is flagged as invalid, but there is no WSDL assertion to use for > error reporting. > > Alternatively, Woden could just ignore these grammar errors and treat them > as ordinary string content in {http location} but the problem would still > need to be resolved when the request IRI is constructed by the message > builder.
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2007 03:50:42 UTC