- From: Xan Gregg <xan@tibco.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 14:58:43 -0500
- To: "'Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI'" <kohsukekawaguchi@yahoo.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
I believe you are right; it does violate the constraint.
xan
-----Original Message-----
From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI [mailto:kohsukekawaguchi@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 6:39 PM
To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Subject: WSDL and possible UPA violation
I found the following part in the WSDL schema, a normative part of W3C
Note (http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl)
---------------------------
<complexType name="operationType">
<complexContent>
<extension base="wsdl:documented">
<choice>
<group ref="wsdl:one-way-operation"/>
<group ref="wsdl:request-response-operation"/>
....
</choice>
....
</extension>
</complexContent>
</complexType>
<group name="one-way-operation">
<sequence>
<element ref="wsdl:input"/>
</sequence>
</group>
<group name="request-response-operation">
<sequence>
<element ref="wsdl:input"/>
<element ref="wsdl:output"/>
<element ref="wsdl:fault" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</sequence>
</group>
---------------------------
I believe this is a violation of UPA, just like the following schema is
a violation of UPA:
<choice>
<element ref="foo"/>
<sequence>
<element ref="foo"/>
<element ref="bar"/>
</sequence>
</choice>
Am I right? Or am I wrong?
regards,
--
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 607 257 0037
Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi@sun.com
Received on Monday, 4 February 2002 14:59:23 UTC