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

RE: [soapbuilders] WSDL schemas update

Expand Messages
  • Matt Long
    Kirill, That s going to break some ppl who developed on the literal definition of sequence (children of definitions) in the previous schema. Thx, -Matt Long
    Message 1 of 10 , Feb 4, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Kirill,

      That's going to break some ppl who developed on the literal definition of
      sequence (children of definitions) in the previous schema.

      Thx,

      -Matt Long
      Phalanx Systems, LLC

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Kirill Gavrylyuk [mailto:kirillg@...]
      > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:22 PM
      > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] WSDL schemas update
      >
      >
      > Hi, Simon!
      > We felt that spec wording does not limit the order of definitions
      > children. So we put a sequence of choice elements to allow any order.
      > What do people think about it?
      >
      > Thanks.
      >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: Simon Fell [mailto:soap@...]
      > > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 7:08 PM
      > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] WSDL schemas update
      > >
      > >
      > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:19:32 -0800, in soap you wrote:
      > >
      > > >Hi, all!
      > > >Following community demand for updating WSDL schemas to
      > > Recommendation
      > > >version of XML Schema, schemas were updated at the following
      > > locations:
      > > >
      > > >Wsdl.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/
      > > >Wsdl-mime.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/mime/
      > > >Wsdl-http.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/http/
      > > >Wsdl-soap.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/
      > > >
      > > >Schemas were also fixed in couple places to match verbiage
      > > of the WSDL
      > > >spec. They were reviewed and approved by spec authors.
      > Please take a
      > > >look and tell us if there are any problems.
      > > >
      > > >Thank you.
      > >
      > > Earlier versions of the schema used a sequence for the
      > > definitions element, now its a repeating choice, was there a
      > > specific reason to go away from requiring the elements in
      > > definitions to be in a specific order ?
      > >
      > > Tx
      > > Simon
      > > www.pocketsoap.com
      > >
      > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > > ---------------------~--> Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value
      > > of Trust Secure all your Web servers now - with a proven
      > > 5-part strategy. The FREE Server Security Guide shows you
      > > how. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iWSNbC/VdiDAA/yigFAA/W6uqlB/TM
      > > --------------------------------------------------------------
      > > -------~->
      > >
      > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
      > > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      > > discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please
      > > stay on-topic.
      > >
      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > ---------------------~-->
      > Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value of Trust
      > Do you need to encrypt all your online transactions? Find
      > the perfect solution in this FREE Guide from VeriSign.
      > http://us.click.yahoo.com/jWSNbC/UdiDAA/yigFAA/W6uqlB/TM
      > --------------------------------------------------------------
      > -------~->
      >
      > -----------------------------------------------------------------
      > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      > discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please
      > stay on-topic.
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Kirill Gavrylyuk
      I see - sure, I don t think there is any problem with reverting it back. Does everybody concur that schema for definitions element should be reverted back to
      Message 2 of 10 , Feb 4, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        I see - sure, I don't think there is any problem with reverting it back.
        Does everybody concur that schema for definitions element should be
        reverted back to <sequence>?
        Thanks


        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Matt Long [mailto:mlong@...]
        > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 8:16 PM
        > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] WSDL schemas update
        >
        >
        > Kirill,
        >
        > That's going to break some ppl who developed on the literal
        > definition of sequence (children of definitions) in the
        > previous schema.
        >
        > Thx,
        >
        > -Matt Long
        > Phalanx Systems, LLC
        >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: Kirill Gavrylyuk [mailto:kirillg@...]
        > > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:22 PM
        > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] WSDL schemas update
        > >
        > >
        > > Hi, Simon!
        > > We felt that spec wording does not limit the order of definitions
        > > children. So we put a sequence of choice elements to allow
        > any order.
        > > What do people think about it?
        > >
        > > Thanks.
        > >
        > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > From: Simon Fell [mailto:soap@...]
        > > > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 7:08 PM
        > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] WSDL schemas update
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:19:32 -0800, in soap you wrote:
        > > >
        > > > >Hi, all!
        > > > >Following community demand for updating WSDL schemas to
        > > > Recommendation
        > > > >version of XML Schema, schemas were updated at the following
        > > > locations:
        > > > >
        > > > >Wsdl.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/
        > > > >Wsdl-mime.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/mime/
        > > > >Wsdl-http.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/http/
        > > > >Wsdl-soap.xsd - http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/
        > > > >
        > > > >Schemas were also fixed in couple places to match verbiage
        > > > of the WSDL
        > > > >spec. They were reviewed and approved by spec authors.
        > > Please take a
        > > > >look and tell us if there are any problems.
        > > > >
        > > > >Thank you.
        > > >
        > > > Earlier versions of the schema used a sequence for the
        > > > definitions element, now its a repeating choice, was there a
        > > > specific reason to go away from requiring the elements in
        > > > definitions to be in a specific order ?
        > > >
        > > > Tx
        > > > Simon
        > > > www.pocketsoap.com
        > > >
        > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > > > ---------------------~--> Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value
        > > > of Trust Secure all your Web servers now - with a proven
        > > > 5-part strategy. The FREE Server Security Guide shows you
        > > > how. http://us.click.yahoo.com/iWSNbC/VdiDAA/yigFAA/W6uqlB/TM
        > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
        > > > -------~->
        > > >
        > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
        > > > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
        > > > discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please
        > > > stay on-topic.
        > > >
        > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > > ---------------------~-->
        > > Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value of Trust
        > > Do you need to encrypt all your online transactions? Find
        > > the perfect solution in this FREE Guide from VeriSign.
        > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/jWSNbC/UdiDAA/yigFAA/W6uqlB/TM
        > > --------------------------------------------------------------
        > > -------~->
        > >
        > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
        > > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
        > > discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please
        > > stay on-topic.
        > >
        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.