|
|
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 02/14/2007 3:26 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
At OGF19:
Optionality on elements is a thorny problem and would be better to think about very carefully. Probably a good topic to leave for v2.0.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 12/18/2006 3:27 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Appending some of the material provided as references:
(The email thread starts with http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/jsdl-wg/2006-November/000793.html)
--
... about the specification of
optional or mandatory extension to JSDL,
following is the link to the WS-Policy specification
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-ws-policy-20061117/
In section 4.3.1 is described how domain specific policy assertions can
specify if they are optional or mandatory
--
and related discussion
--
Yes I thought about that but it's still a kind of default value. "If it's not there then it's mandatory".
steve..
Andreas Savva wrote:
> One possibility, perhaps an ugly one, is to define Optional so that it can only take one value: 'true'. Then it can appear only if an extension is
optional.
>
> A.S.McGough wrote:
>> That structure of Optional="true" would seem to work for backwards compatibility. Though it would break the statement that in all JSDL documents
there are no defaults. As we'd have to say if Optional is not defined then Optional="false". Otherwise the "there are no defaults in JSDL" would allow
people to say if its not defined then I can do what I want - which will probably be to ignore it!
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 12/18/2006 3:22 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Appending some of the material provided as references:
(The full email is http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/jsdl-wg/2006-November/000802.html)
The relevant information can be found in the WSDL Binding document, and in
the accompanying XML Schema definition, which can be found at
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/addressing/wsdl/ws-addr-wsdl.xsd
Chapter 3.1 of the WSDL Binding document describes the indication of the
use of WS-Addressing in a WSDL document. It defines an empty element
"wsaw:UsingAdddressing" element that allows for composition with any
attribute from other namespaces. In particular, the WS-Addressing 1.0 WSDL
Bining document uses the "wsdl:required" attribute to mix-in the level of
WS-Adddressing enfoorcement.
The "wsaw:UsingAddressing" element SHOULD appear in the wsdl:binding
section, but MAY instead appear in wsdl:port (WSDL 1.1) or wsdl20:endpoint
if WS-Addressing compliance shall be indicated for a specific endpoint.
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
Andreas Savva: 11/29/2006 9:39 AM EST
|
| |
Comment: |
Looks like a compatible change.
Could be just a statement in the specification in the Extensions section that such an attribute (name defined by us) should be defined in each
extension if the extension authors think it may be optional.
optional=true
optional=false
not present means not optional
- Should it be defined in a schema (jsdl:?) or is a statement in the spec sufficient?
- Look up ws-policy as an example of this.
- ws-addressing as an example
|
| |
Action: |
Update
|
|
|
|
