Matt,
Thanks very much for your comments. I will forward
them to the team.
I handed editorial control over to John Colgrave a
few months back, and I must admit, I haven't perused the current document with a
fine-toothed comb.
1. We did some redesign of the tModels near the
end, and we did away with the WSDL URL Reference and WSDL URL tModels
(originially they were designed to support a "WSDL deployment" option -- which
would permit you to reference a WSDL document to obtain the access point of the
service -- after considerable debate we elected to remove this option.) But it
appears that John neglected to remove the references to the tModels in section
2.3.3.
2. These three tModels were the last ones we
created, and John just didn't generate them before submitting the draft for
review. They will be specified in the final document.
3. I'd say that this is a semantically
irrelevant typo -- but I'll tell John to fix it. (As you same -- keyName is
not semantically relevant)
4. You are correct -- but John hadn't generated the
V2 keys...
Best regards,
Anne
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:45
PM
Subject: question about WSDL/UDDI TN 2
(information missing from document)
Hi
Anne,
I had a couple
questions about the OASIS technical note about Using WSDL in a UDDI Registry,
v2.0. I figured I'd mail them to you, as you are listed as an
editor. If there's a better party to whom to send these comments, could
you either forward them or let me know who that party is so I can forward
them? Thanks. I didn't want to subscribe to a list simply to point
out issues with the document that appear to be oversights (rather than items
for discussion about the content itself). I'm relatively new to UDDI,
but I think these are legitimate findings, so please bear with
me.
- In section 2.3.3
(New Canonical tModels, the document makes reference to such new models as
"WSDL URL Reference" and "WSDL URL", and says they "are described in
Appendix B. However, I was unable to find them described anywhere in
the document. I was able to find the other new canonical models (WSDL
Entity Type, XML Namespace, XML Local Name, WSDL portType Reference, SOAP
Protocol, and HTTP Protocol, Protocol Categorization, Transport
Categorization, and WSDL Address). So, of the 12 new tModels, nine are
described and two are totally absent from the document. Where can I
find descriptions of and usage examples for these missing
tModels?
- I was surprised to
see that for three tModels, the V1,V2 format key was not provided. It
seems odd, that if the authors were able to hash keys for six other tModels,
that these three would not have their V1/V2 keys provided. Is there a
particular reason for this omission, or is this just an oversight.
Here are the hashed V1/V2 keys, should they be of use (I used the InspireIT
UDDI client library to generate them, and cross-checked them against
expected results where both the v3 and v1/v2 keys are known).
uddi:uddi.org:wsdl:categorization:protocol
uuid:ee733f78-b289-3637-8ff5-1623ea4672dd
uddi:uddi.org:wsdl:categorization:transport
uuid:4eeccd58-d3b0-3a6f-a466-9cce01cb1273
uddi:uddi.org:wsdl:address
uuid:2646df99-ec31-3c67-80e2-5743d0c0e829
- In the tModel
Structure provided in B.7.2.1 (uuid:uddi.org:wsdl:categorization:protocol)
it gives a keyedReference with a keyName of "uddi-org:types:checked" and a
keyValue of "unchecked". While the uddi server will ostensibly ignore
the keyName, it seems that for better readability the name and the value
should correspond. However, I may not understand the reason behind
this choice of "checked". Is this an oversight, or is there something
here I'm not understanding? (this issue repeats on other tModel structure
listings.
- On page 20 of the
document, in the description of the UDDI binding tModel for the example WSDL
specification, I think any reader would find useful the inclusion of the
correct keys (or at least an explanation of what keys to use) for attaching
references to SOAP and HTTP to the category bag. Currently, the
listing reads tModelKey="uuid:xxx"" (hardly intuitive, and not very
useful). I'm assuming these references should point to the Protocol
Categorization and Transport Categorization tModels, and the key values
should be the tModel keys for the SOAP and HTTP tModels, respectively.
Is this correct?
Thanks for your help
on these issues, and for your work on the document. I wouldn't be
writing you with these comments if it weren't to try to help improve an
already well-written, easily readable document.
Matt Geis
|