David:
My personal opinion is that the entire section 2.3.2
xsi:schemaLocation attribute is obsolete and no longer necessary now
that the "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
namespace and the "http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/msg-header-2_0.xsd"
namespace can be directly resolvable (see strategies 3 and 5 in the following
excerpt from http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/).
4.3.2 How schema definitions are located
on the Web
Schema Representation Constraint: Schema Document Location
Strategy
Given a namespace name (or none) and
(optionally) a URI reference from xsi:schemaLocation or
xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation, schema-aware processors may
implement any combination of the following strategies, in any order:
1 Do nothing, for instance because a
schema containing components for the given namespace name is already known to be
available, or because it is known in advance that no efforts to locate schema
documents will be successful (for example in embedded systems);
2 Based on the location URI, identify an
existing schema document, either as a resource which is an XML document or a
<schema> element information
item, in some local schema repository;
3 Based on the namespace name, identify
an existing schema document, either as a resource which is an XML document or a
<schema> element information
item, in some local schema repository;
4 Attempt to resolve the location URI,
to locate a resource on the web which is or contains or references a <schema> element;
5 Attempt to resolve the namespace name
to locate such a resource.
Whenever
possible configuration and/or invocation options for selecting and/or ordering
the implemented strategies should be provided.
If we adopt this change, then all of the examples should have
the schema locations for the above two namespaces removed.
In addition, the introductory material in Appendix A also needs
tweaking.
If we choose not to make the suggested changes, we should at least update
the cached schemas we have on the ebxml-msg TC web site for the SOAP envelope
and for xmldsig-core-schema.
Regards,
-Arvola
-----Original Message-----
From:
David Fischer <>
To:
Arvola Chan <>
Date:
Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:15 PM
Subject: RE: schema in
[ebxml-msg] v2.0 rev b, etc.
Did I get this right? It required changes
throughout the document.
What did we decide about xsi:schemaLocation? Do
we need it in all the examples?
David.
-----Original Message-----
From: Arvola Chan
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:14
PM
To: David Fischer; Ian. C. Jones (E-mail); ebXML
Msg
Subject: Re: schema in [ebxml-msg] v2.0 rev b,
etc.
David:
I am not sure if we really want to leave the following
unchanged in the schema:
1.
<import
namespace="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#"
schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/xmldsig-core-schema.xsd"/>
2.
<import
namespace="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/xlink.xsd"/>
3.
<import
namespace="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/envelope.xsd"/>
With
respect to #1 above, please see
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200202/msg00154.html
I think we should be referencing the official version of
xmldsig-core-schema.xsd instead of the snapshot we have been maintaining at
our web site.
With respect to #2 above, I am not able to find any
official xlink.xsd on the W3C web site. We will have to continue to use our
own version located at our web site unless someone can identify the location
for an official version of xlink.xsd.
With respect to #3 above, please see
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200202/msg00056.html
We may want to use "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
as the schema location since that is the official SOAP 1.1 schema. The only
potential issue is that the former includes Annotation and you have
previously mentioned that some parsers used by members of the interop team
cannot deal with Annotation.
I also notice two minor problems in the References
section:
1. The correct URL for BPSS should be http://www.ebxml.org/specs/ebBPSS.pdf
2. Xlink has been a W3C Recommendation since June 27,
2001. See http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/
-Arvola
-----Original Message-----
From:
David Fischer <>
To:
Ian. C. Jones (E-mail) <>
Cc:
ebXML Msg <>
Date:
Tuesday, February 19, 2002 1:02 PM
Subject: [ebxml-msg] v2.0
rev b
Ian,
Here
is what we have at the moment. I have included both an MSWord
document and a PDF. The PDF has change control off and the MSWord
has it on.
I
did not accept the changes from Rev A so both Rev A and Rev B changes
show. In my copy, Rev A changes are in Blue and Rev B changes are in
Red. In MSWord, if you put your cursor over the change, it will say
"David V Fischer" on the Rev A changes and "David Fischer" on the Rev B
changes. It would probably be appropriate, if anyone wants to make
quick comments in the next day or so, to use the line numbers in the
PDF.
I
don't think either of these documents is appropriate to vote
on. Arvola said he would review the schema (Appendix A) and let me
know what further changes I need to make to align with his
copy.
I
don't know where we are on the change control document. I have not
looked at anything since Rev A but I have made a couple of changes based
upon the conference calls and the eMail list (mostly related to Errata
locations and OPTIONAL treatment and Chris' item 229). The easiest
way to see these is to look for changes marked in red (at least it is red
on my PC).
One
final thought. If we vote on this and it passes, I would like to
suggest we change the version of the last document to v1.9 and this one to
v2.0.
Regards,
David Fischer
Drummond Group
ebXML-MS
Editor.
