conf claim proposal

[Jacques Durand <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>]

Issue:

Conformance claims have to reflect possible conformance clauses = different ways to conform.

Solution:

Extend the conf claim schema so that it allows “modes” of conformance, while still validating previous legacy conf claims:

<xs:schema targetNamespace="http://ws-i.org/profiles/basic-profile/1.2/"

    xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" elementFormDefault="qualified" blockDefault="#all">

    <xs:element name="Conformant">

        <xs:complexType>

            <xs:sequence>

                <xs:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"

                    maxOccurs="unbounded"/>

                <xs:element maxOccurs="unbounded" minOccurs="0" name="mode"/>

            </xs:sequence>

            <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>

        </xs:complexType>

    </xs:element>

</xs:schema>

 

======================== example for BP1.2 claim:

<Conformant xmlns='http://ws-i.org/profiles/basic-profile/1.2/'/>

<mode>HTTP-TRANSPORT</mode>

</Conformant>

 

======================== example for RSP1.0 claim:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<Conformant xmlns='http://ws-i.org/profiles/reliable-secure-profile/1.0/'>

<mode>BP1.2</mode>

<mode>CORE</mode>

</Conformant>