[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Issue 74: foreign namespace attributes
+1 -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 6:55 PM To: Arvola Chan Cc: Doug Bunting; ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Issue 74: foreign namespace attributes +1 Arvola Chan wrote: > Doug: > > > > I am in favor of option 7, i.e., wherever we introduce a wildcard > element in the ebMS schema, we also have a corresponding wildcard > attribute (under the same parent element). My rationale is to allow for > the use of an xsi:schemaLocation attribute to indentify the schema for > the foreign namespace used in the corresponding wildcard element. > > > > I agree that the namespace for the wildcard attributes should be > "##other". I don't want to limit the wildcard attributes to only be > drawn from the "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" namespace. > > > > Thanks, > > -Arvola > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Bunting <dougb62@yahoo.com <mailto:dougb62@yahoo.com>> > To: ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org > <mailto:ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org> > <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org <mailto:ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>> > Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 3:55 PM > Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Issue 74: foreign namespace attributes > > All, > > We seem to have gotten fairly far afield from the original issue > number 74: A recommendation describing how our extension mechanisms > should be used and pointing implementers to another option (defining > their own SOAP extension elements). I specifically recommended that > the first additional paragraph not be included if we went back to > allowing foreign attributes in the schema. Irrespective of that > decision (which hasn't been made yet), the non-normative Note I > suggested adds value to the documentation. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > The issue of foreign attributes is not captured in the current > issues list because nobody has been able to cull the email archives > for additional issues. I believe Arvola raised this issue most > recently in an email entitled "Minor discrepancy between spec and > schema". That thread ended with my comments [1] recommending > wildcard attributes be allowed only on the Manifest and Reference > elements, leaving the option for MessageHeader open. I was never > recommending including this option in all top-level SOAP extension > elements we're defining, which would be a major technical change to > the protocol from 1.0 at a rather late stage. (In fact, it wouldn't > help with extensions to the Reference element.) I was recommending > a return to the foreign attributes that should have been supported > in 1.0 but were (in the case of the MessageHeader element) slightly > misplaced. > > I'd also point out our schema does not support wildcard elements > everywhere, just in the Error, Reference and all top-level SOAP > extension elements. This is a long list but not all of the elements > we're defining. I could support following this same choice with > respect to foreign attributes but would have trouble with extending > all top-level SOAP extension elements without at least the Reference > element. > > Foreign attribute options seem to be: > 1) leave them out of the schema, as they are in the original 2.0 schema > 2) return to the 1.0 state, including foreign attributes on the > Manifest and MessageHeader elements > 3) correct issue with 1.0 allowances and move foreign attributes > from MessageHeader to Reference > 4) include foreign attributes in all of Manifest, Reference and > MessageHeader elements > 5) include foreign attributes in all of the SOAP extension elements > we define > 6) do (5) and Reference element > 7) do (6) and Error element, matching distribution of wildcard > elements we presently support > > I proposed option (3) but think anything but (1) or (5) would be > workable. (2) would be the least preferable of the remaining set. > I don't believe we should be doing namespace="#any" or > namespace="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" anywhere, > namespace="#other" is the right choice as described in earlier > emails on this thread [2]. > > thanx, > doug > > [1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200201/msg00135.html > [2] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200202/msg00077.html > <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200202/msg00077.html> > ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC