CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Tue, 07 Oct 2025 13:11:54 GMT
content-type: text/html
content-encoding: gzip
last-modified: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 23:26:48 GMT
cache-control: max-age=2592000, public
expires: Thu, 06 Nov 2025 13:11:54 GMT
vary: Accept-Encoding
access-control-allow-origin: *
x-request-id: 98ada5a54c8fc19a
strict-transport-security: max-age=15552015; preload
x-frame-options: deny
x-xss-protection: 1; mode=block
cf-cache-status: MISS
set-cookie: __cf_bm=y7XTGXxWE5BKQwUUdThZnTrHy17J.FCO4poQobPJeoM-1759842714-1.0.1.1-ZWhUq_90HhSk463C.hERvFRRqywlrKaEQ5l6dro02LCzjb3JP7DR6D4vNsC8GUm172VmErR4sdMo1MWQ.J6LRCJFyoaNxr6mZXvOMiWD__M; path=/; expires=Tue, 07-Oct-25 13:41:54 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
server: cloudflare
cf-ray: 98ada5a54c8fc19a-BLR
alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400
Issue 8 (editorial): can we close? from Jonathan Marsh on 2003-12-10 (www-ws-desc@w3.org from December 2003)
Issue 8 (editorial): can we close?
- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:41:36 -0800
- To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <DF1BAFBC28DF694A823C9A8400E71EA202011CC9@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Issue 8 [1] titled "Inconsistency in definition of attribute extensibility states "In section 2.1, extensibility is explicitly stated for all the elements, but not for attributes. In the WSDL Schema, PartType is extended from "openAtts". This means anyAttributes can be defined in addition to the three optional attributes specified for Part (name, type, element). Though it mentions in section 2.3 that "other message-typing attributes may be defined as long as they use a namespace different from that of WSDL", it would be better for those who use the grammar as a convenient reference if this is also reflected in section 2.1." It appears that the section numbers are from the WSDL 1.1 spec, which has pseudo-syntax for the whole WSDL 1.1 document structure. This pseudo-syntax uses comments to indicate where element extensibility is allowed (everywhere). There is no notation in the pseudo-syntax for attribute extensions (also allowed everywhere). In our latest draft, we have pseudo-syntax for each component, rather than for the whole document. Our pseudo-syntax does not call out extensibility points, either for elements or attributes, since they are ubiquitous. Section describes both element and attribute extensibility. I suggest that we have met the spirit of this comment, providing equal billing between the descriptions element and attribute extensibility, and should close it. [1] https://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x8
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2003 16:41:36 UTC