- From: Simon Fell <soap@zaks.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 09:30:50 -0700
- To: www-ws@w3.org
You might want to checkout a similar thread from the WSDL list, start with http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wsdl/message/112 Cheers Simon www.pocketsoap.com On Mon, 2 Jul 2001 17:03:20 +0100 , in soap you wrote: >Anyone able to shed some light on the wsdl import statement as described in >http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl-20010315 ><http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl-20010315> ? > >In section 2.1.2 example 2 the import statement within file >"stockquote.wsdl" appears to import a <schema> element (in "stockquote.xsd") >as the direct child of a <definitions>, whereas the WSDL grammar mandates >that the <schema> element should be contained within a <types> element... > >Further on the import statement within file "stockquoteservice.wsdl" appears >to import a <definitions> element as the direct child of an enclosing ><definitions> - again this appears to be contrary to the grammar as laid out >in 2.1. > >Is there some implied rules associated with a import statement (e.g. if the >importee is a schema an enclosing <types> element may be inferred). If so >maybe the authors could make the rules clear in the next rev. of the spec. > >Or maybe its just that I'm missing something :-( > > Simon > > > >
Received on Monday, 2 July 2001 12:32:26 UTC