RE: [wsrf] Proposed resolution to WSRF 174 - references to instances ofMDDs

[Tim Banks <tim_banks@uk.ibm.com>]

Hi Bryan,

As described by Ian in [1]...

> (b) requires the schema of the MetadataDescriptor element to be changed.
> In psuedo schema terms, this would be a change from this:
> <MetadataDescriptor
>       name="xsd:NCName"
>       interface="xsd:QName"
>       wsdlLocation="pairs of xsd:anyUri"?
>       {anyAttribute}* >
>
>   <documentation />?
>   <Property /> *
>   {any}*
> </MetadataDescriptor>
>
> to this:
>
> <MetadataDescriptor>
>     <name>xsd:NCName</name>
>      <interface>xsd:QName</interface>
>       <wsdlLocation>pairs of xsd:anyUri</wsdlLocation>?
>      <documentation />?
>      <Property /> *
>      {any}*
> </MetadataDescriptor>
>

But... (b) also requires the declaration of the targetNamespace  for the
Metadata descriptor, without which it cannot be referenced (from a
portType) via a Qname.  So,  is this targetNamespace information also to be
provided as a child element,  like this?

 <MetadataDescriptor>
 >>>       <targetNamespace>xsd:anyUri</targetNamespace>
           <name>xsd:NCName</name>
           <interface>xsd:QName</interface>
           <wsdlLocation>pairs of xsd:anyUri</wsdlLocation>?
           <documentation />?
           <Property /> *
           {any}*
 </MetadataDescriptor>

I worry that this is getting into the realms of extreme-XML, and can find
no precedent for this kind of construction; can you help me?


Regards, Tim Banks.


[1]
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrf/email/archives/200604/msg00051.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Murray, Bryan P." <bryan.murray@hp.com> wrote on 24/04/2006 21:55:16:

> If MetadataDescriptor is the root of the resource properties document,
> what is the advantage of restricting a Definitions element to a single
> MDD?
>
> I like (b) the best.
>
> Bryan
>