Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

51Re: [soapbuilders] Userland SOAP Validator

Expand Messages
  • Simon Fell
    Feb 8, 2001
      However all SOAP (ignoring what's happening with WSDL for now)
      implementations are using the 1999 version of XSD, so this shouldn't
      be a problem.

      This does however highlight a problem i've raised before, as the
      schema specs continue to evolve, how does this effect SOAP and WSDL,
      there's no built in mechanism for a client to request that the server
      use a particular schema version. Which seems to push us to a receiver
      makes right model, probably migrating schema info using XSLT.


      On Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:41:45 -0500 , in soap you wrote:

      >A quick note for interop purposes with other Schema-aware systems.
      >"ur-type" is no longer the name for the "any" type in Schema. The
      >10/24/2000 Schema release (see [1])replaced it with "anyType".
      >We should be retooling our implementations to support this change.
      >[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xmlschema-1-20001024/#Type_Derivation
      >> -----Original Message-----
      >> From: Simon Fell [mailto:soap@...]
      >> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:10 AM
      >> To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
      >> Subject: [soapbuilders] Userland SOAP Validator
      >> [I'm sending this again as PacBell appear to be randomly loosing
      >> email]
      >> Wooo Hooo, i got 4s4c to pass the validator :)
      >> Quite an interesting exercise, it forced me to
      >> a) add support for arrays of xsd:ur-type (each item can be a different
      >> type)
      >> b) fix my broken TZ correction code in xsd:timeInstant support (not
      >> sure how i didn't spot this before)
      >> So, this was a against a private version of 4s4c (1.31), I'll
      >> hopefully be releasing it at the end of the week.
      >> Dave, i noticed on the timeInstant check (in manyTypesTest), that when
      >> you return the wrong timeInstant, the value that the error message
      >> says it was expecting is wrong.
      >> I was surprised by some of the constructs, particular the calendar
      >> one, i would of expected this to use arrays, rather than nested
      >> structs. There really should be a test for handling arrays of structs.
      >> Cheers
      >> Simon
      >> www.pocketsoap.com
      >> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      >> ---------------------~-~>
      >> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
      >> Click here for more details
      >> http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981648712/
      >> --------------------------------------------------------------
      >> -------_->
      >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >> soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    • Show all 11 messages in this topic