|
Hi
Jeff, in attempting to load these schemas into my editor, I discovered the
following issues
draft_pstc_schema_core_04.xsd
-
complexType declared for 'DelRequest', should be 'DeleteRequest' for internal
consistency as well as with draft_pstc_schemma_request_02.xsd's deleteRequest
element
draft_pstc_schema_request_02.xsd
- 'urn:oasis:names:tc:SPML:1:0:core' namespace on
import element does not match 'urn:oasis:names:tc:SPML:1:0:core'
declration in draft_pstc_schema_request_02.xsd
- perhaps limited to my editor but it didn't like the
whitepace in the default & enumeration values of 'synchonous ' for the
execution attribute
draft_pstc_schema_extended_proposal_01.xsd
- 'urn:oasis:names:tc:SPML:1:0:core'
namespace on import element does not match 'urn:oasis:names:tc:SPML:1:0:core'
in draft_pstc_schema_request_02.xsd
-
'spml' namepace prefix on type attribute of operationIdentifier
element
I've
attached modified versions of the schemas that my editor no longer complains
about (but yours might)
Paul
Attached are draft schemas for the
F2F on Tue.
The core 04 schema incorporates
suggested changes, includes SAML Subject Assertions as an identifier, and have
the comments stripped out. There is are place holders
for the extended requests, but ignore those.
The request 02 schema just has a
couple of syntax fixes from the request 01
schema.
The extended proposal 01 includes
the last compromise proposal in the form of an XSD, but without BMCs latest suggestions. We need to reconcile these at the
F2F and then fold them into the core.
Jeff
Bohren
Product
Architect
OpenNetwork
Technologies, Inc
|