Some parts of this message have been removed.
Learn more about Nabble's
security policy.
For the record, the WG resolved this issue [1] by accepting your
proposal. I’ve just fixed it in the XML source. [2]
Since you were present, we know you agree with this resolution.
[1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4550
[2] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.xml
Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
I'd like to propose replacing
the text associated with the EBNF grammar in section 6.8.1.1:
"The following EBNF [ISO/IEC 14977:1966] grammar represents the patterns
for constructing the request IRI"
with the new assertion HTTPSerialization-2106:
"The {http location} property MUST conform to the following EBNF [ISO/IEC
14977:1966] grammar, which represents the patterns for constructing the request
IRI."
regards,
John Kaputin.
On 5/4/07, John Kaputin (gmail)
<jakaputin@...> wrote:
There is no WSDL assertion stating that an {http location}
or whttp:location must conform to the EBNF grammar defined in Part 2 Section 6.8.1.1.
Consider the following whttp:location values, which do not conform to this EBNF
grammar:
"/to}wn/{localname}" (unmatched left brace)
"/town/{local:name}" (template does not specify an NCName)
"/town/{localname" (closing right brace is missing)
Should these be considered WSDL errors? If so, should there be an assertion
about the EBNF grammar? Apache Woden parses the whttp:location attribute
and if it does not conform to the EBNF grammar the {http location} property is
flagged as invalid, but there is no WSDL assertion to use for error reporting.
Alternatively, Woden could just ignore these grammar errors and treat them as
ordinary string content in {http location} but the problem would still need to
be resolved when the request IRI is constructed by the message builder.
John Kaputin.
