RE: Second level xs:import

The *design* limitation, was that schema wanted people to be *explicit*
about namespaces they wanted to use. So, in order to reference
components in namespace foo, a schema MUST have an import for namespace
foo ( or itself be a schema for namespace foo ). 

I think it is a reasonable design decision to make for WSDL too.

Gudge 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Yaron Goland
> Sent: 26 January 2004 17:30
> To: 'Amelia A Lewis'; 'David Orchard'
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Second level xs:import
> 
> 
> While I can appreciate the wisdom in re-use, re-use should 
> only be done with open eyes and full understanding. Do we 
> know the technical reason why the restriction is there? If 
> not then we should either find out or remove the restriction.
> 	Thanks,
> 		Yaron
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
> > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 12:05 PM
> > To: David Orchard
> > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Second level xs:import
> >
> >
> >
> > Because that works the same way that schema import does, and that's 
> > what it's modeled on.
> >
> > Amy!
> > On Jan 26, 2004, at 2:54 PM, David Orchard wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Why is it illegal to reference items that are included in an 
> > > imported/included schema vis xs:import? (per section 3 of part 1)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Dave
> > >
> >
> >
> 
>

Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 11:38:18 UTC