[OGSA-BES-WG] BES schema/wsdl

[Vivian Li]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter G. Lane [mailto:lane at mcs.anl.gov]
> Sent: 26 October 2006 15:20
> To: Vivian Li
> Cc: ogsa-bes-wg at ogf.org
> Subject: Re: BES schema/wsdl
> 
> Vivian Li wrote:
> > Its only a matter of convention, and, it surly make life easier when
> > talking about debug the tooling, (of course you can say this is out
of
> > the scope for now), but for the long run, it is a better practice,
and
> > the modification - only a cut/paste job.
> 
> I don't see how it makes debugging tooling easier. I also haven't seen
a
> compelling argument to be
> able to say it is inherently a better practice. But as I said, if it's
a
> trend that the working
> group wants to follow, fine. Regardless, until I see a convincing
argument
> to the contrary, I'm
> sticking with my belief that it's better from an organizational point
of
> view (think object
> oriented) to encapsulate in the WSDL document the set of schema types
and
> elements that have no
> relevance outside of that WSDL.

Exactly - all the data types, including WSDL message types, (complexType
& elements) that potentially will be generated as objects, should all go
to the schema, WSDL document is only for messages and portTypes. I think
that is a better organization.

Its your call.

 
> Peter
> 
> > Vivian
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Peter G. Lane [mailto:lane at mcs.anl.gov]
> >> Sent: 24 October 2006 16:55
> >> To: Vivian Li
> >> Cc: ogsa-bes-wg at ogf.org
> >> Subject: Re: BES schema/wsdl
> >>
> >> I argued against this, actually, because the types that are in the
> > WSDL
> >> don't have any applicability
> >> outside of the WSDL. That said, if the rest of the group thinks
that
> >> convention is enough to
> >> overlook that, I'm not going to complain. We're trying to avoid
large
> >> changes like this so we can
> >> release the spec for public review, so my vote would still be to
leave
> > it
> >> alone regardless.
> >>
> >> Peter
> >>
> >> Vivian Li wrote:
> >>> Another suggestion while browsing the BES schema/wsdl, it might be
> >>> easier to maintain if the data types in the schema and the wsdl
are
> >>> separated completely, e.g. move the "Message Types" in the schema
> >>> section from the wsdl to the schema file, it has been kind of
> > convention
> >>> in all the other WGs.
> >>>
> >>> Vivian
> >>>
> >