[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Changes to UDDI Schemas and WSDL to support code generation
> (iii) is the interesting case, which is the one I though we had been > discussing all along. Certainly some clients would be able > to form requests > that are compliant to the lite schema, but fail validation under the > normative schema. But without a JAX-RPC-compatible schema > these clients > would not be able to form *any* kind of requests, so lite > schema is still > progress in the right direction. The problem is that we are chasing a moving target. As Anne and Ugo have pointed out JAX-RPC is moving towards a more WS-I compliant version (and I'm not sure whether John was basing his analysis on JAX-RPC 1.0 or 1.1), so it might be that we spend time addressing issues which turn out no longer to be issues. >After all, even using the current >normative schema clients can form a wide variety of invalid requests that >are schema-compliant (how about a <find_business generic="2.0"/> for one?). Agreed - which means that there is some argument for simplifying certain structures (e.g. the sequence/choice one) even if it introduces invalid requests not caught by schema-validation, however, I still think if we did that level of change (and that sort of change was typical of what would be needed to increase the toolkit support) those changes should be in the normative schema. My point about clients and servers not being consistent about what XML they validate, is due to the fact that I am uncomfortable having two non-isomorphic schemas for the same namespace. Matthew
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]