Re: [wsrf] [WSRF Issue 81] clarification

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

Sorry, this is my own opinion, (sometimes design is like art, in that it 
allows different interpretations).

My understanding it that include brings the "externally defined stuff" 
into the target namespace, so you have two places where this "external 
stuff" is
"held".  (the original file and the target namespace).  It ust seems 
easier to me,  to put any external
stuff (i.e. non inline definitions) into a file with a namespace, and 
use xsd:import whenever that stuff is needed in another
xml document (like a wsdl definition types section).

Could you give me any examples of how "xsd:import" aids maintenance over 
time of a set of xml documents?

Tom Rutt

Steve Graham wrote:

>
> can you expand on why the semantics of xsd:import are any easier to 
> support than xsd:include?  I don't see much of a distinction to 
> conclude either are particularly easier to support.
>
> sgg
>
> ++++++++
> Steve Graham
> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> ++++++++
>
>
>
> *Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>*
>
> 11/30/2004 10:10 AM
> Please respond to
> tom
>
>
> 	
> To
> 	Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
> cc
> 	Steve Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, 
> Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM@IBMUS, wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject
> 	Re: [wsrf] [WSRF Issue 81] clarification
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> I remember the wsi-bp discussions the same as Anish.  WS-I bp does allow
> xsd:include in the type section.
>
> However, the wsrm group is allowed to decide on its own not to use xsd:
> include in our specifications.  Personally, I think that import
> has semantics which are easier to maintain on the long run than include.
>
> Tom Rutt
> Fujitsu
>
> Anish Karmarkar wrote:
>
> > WS-I BP 1.0/1.1 does *not* say that one should not use xsd:include.
> >
> > The requirements in section 4.2.2 [1] are meant to prevent someone
> > from using xsd:import to import WSDL docs and using wsdl:import to
> > import XSD docs. It does not talk about xsd:include since there is
> > nothing equivalent to that in WSDL.
> >
> > Essentially:
> > 1) xsd:import and xsd:include follow the rules defined by XML Schema
> > and import/include schemas in the types section of WSDL. Such
> > xsd:import/xsd:include can occur only as a child of
> > wsdl:definitions/wsdl:types/xsd:schema
> > 2) wsdl:import imports WSDL documents and *not* XSD docs and must
> > occur only as child element of wsdl:definitions
> >
> > These requirement seem to be NOOP/obvious, but during the discussion
> > in WS-I BP WG, it was revealed that this was indeed a interop concern
> > as some folks used xsd:import/wsdl:import to do weird things -- hence
> > their inclusion.
> >
> > HTH.
> >
> > -Anish
> > --
> >
> > [1]
> > 
> http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.1-2004-08-24.html#WSDL_and_Schema_Import 
>
> >
> >
> > Steve Graham wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi Chris:
> >> As a co-author on WS-I BP 1.1, could you provide some insight into
> >> R2002?
> >>
> >> sgg
> >>
> >> ++++++++
> >> Steve Graham
> >> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> >> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> >> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> >> <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> >> ++++++++
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS*
> >>
> >> 11/29/2004 03:22 PM
> >>
> >>    
> >> To
> >>     wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
> >> cc
> >>    
> >> Subject
> >>     RE: [wsrf] [WSRF Issue 81] clarification
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The discussion in this area revolves around how to interpret the
> >> following statement from WS-I BP:
> >>
> >> R2002 To import XML Schema Definitions, a DESCRIPTION MUST use the
> >> XML Schema "import" statement.
> >>
> >> If the first "import" is interpreted to mean "reference external",
> >> then this statement requires the use of import rather than include.
> >>
> >> If the first "import" is interpreted to mean the definition provided
> >> by XML Schema for the import statement, then it doesn't have that
> >> meaning but also becomes a meaningless statement.
> >>
> >> Rich
> >>
> >> *"Murray, Bryan P." <bryan.murray@hp.com>*
> >>
> >> 11/29/2004 03:03 PM
> >>
> >>    
> >> To
> >>     Steve Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, <wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >> cc
> >>    
> >> Subject
> >>     RE: [wsrf] [WSRF Issue 81] clarification
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I believe that the statement about WS-I was made at the October
> >> face-to-face although my memory is notoriously faulty. I searched
> >> through email and meeting minutes and did not find discussion of this
> >> point.
> >>  
> >> Unless someone can point out the requirement in WS-I BP, I suggest we
> >> remove that statement from the issue.
> >>  
> >> Bryan
> >>
> >> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> *From:* Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com] *
> >> Sent:* Monday, November 29, 2004 11:14 AM*
> >> To:* wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org*
> >> Subject:* [wsrf] [WSRF Issue 81] clarification
> >>
> >>
> >> The current issues list contains an entry for WSRF 81 that includes:
> >>
> >> *Issue WSRF81: Recommendation to change WSDL documents*
> >>
> >> Some tooling does not correctly handle xsd:include.
> >>
> >> WS-I compliance requires that xsd:include not be used.
> >>
> >> */Specifications/*
> >>
> >> ·        All WSDL documents
> >>
> >> */Notes/*
> >>
> >> _http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrf/200410/msg00113.html_
> >>
> >> _http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrf/200410/msg00120.html_
> >>
> >> */Proposed Recommendations/*
> >>
> >> Change all WSDL documents so that xsd:include is not used. This can
> >> be accomplished by changing the namespace of the schema in the WSDL
> >> types section and using xsd:import instead.
> >>
> >> */Status: Open since November 15, 2004 /*
> >>
> >> */Contact: Glenn Wassen, Abdeslem Djaoui/*
> >>
> >> */Cross Reference: /*
> >>
> >> Now, the notion "WS-I compliance requires that xsd:include not be
> >> used." is puzzling.  I cannot see reference in WS-I BP 1.1 that
> >> forbids use of xsd:include, please clarify.
> >>
> >> sgg
> >> ++++++++
> >> Steve Graham
> >> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> >> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> >> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> >> <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> >> ++++++++
> >>
> >
>
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt                 email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
>
>
>

-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133