Anne, Thanks very much for sharing your view of the potential use of RDDL in the web services community.
I have noticed that some of the important namespaces in the XML community have adopted RDDL. For example: * http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace * http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema * http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform * http://docs.oasis-open.org/codelist/ns/genericode/1.0/ But most (if not all) of the important namespaces in the web service community simply point to the corresponding XML schema having the same targetNamespace as the namespace name. For example: * http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/ * http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/ * http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/ * http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/http/ Given your recommendation, what do you think one might further leverage the RDDL approach in the web services community? For example, what are the specific "metadata files" should be included as links in a RDDL page for a given targetNamespace of a WSDL document? Regards, Scott ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anne Thomas Manes Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 9:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] URI for targetNamespace Attribute Value A namespace is a name for a collection of related things -- not a metadata file.You should maintain a separation of concerns between the name and the files that describe it. Also bear in mind that you might have multiple metadata files contributing to the same namespace. This is particularly true when you update a schema but want to ensure backward compatibility. I recommend having the namespace URL point to a RDDL page. RDDL can contain a human-readable description, as well as owner/contact information, links to the metadata files (e.g., WSDL, Schema, Policy, etc), and links to previous versions. Anne On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Steve Jones <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Direct, never thought of RDDL. But don't expect many people to actually use the link. Putting a decent search engine on the repository remains the most important thing. Steve On 17 July 2010 03:31, Tsao, Scott <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Steve, Thanks for the reply! Do you use the URL for the targetNamespace of your WSDL to link directly to the formal documentation in your service repository, or through some kind of intermediary such as RDDL<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDDL>? Scott ________________________________ From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Steve Jones Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 11:17 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] URI for targetNamespace Attribute Value You can use it in the same way to link from the technical interface (WSDL) to the formal documentation for the interface. I've used it to link into the service repository documentation set. However as with the XSD URI I've found that probably only 1 in 20 people actually find and use the link. Steve On 14 July 2010 14:51, Tsao, Scott <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: As I understand, it is a preferred practice to use URL instead of URN for the targetNamespace attribute value of an XML schema. And the primary reason is that one could use the XSD namespace URL to document the use of an XML schema. See: http://xsd.stylusstudio.com/2009Sep/post01000.htm However, I wonder if this practice should also be applied to the targetNamespace attribute value of a WSDL document. I don't see as strong a reason to do so as for XML schema. What do you think? Thanks, Scott Tsao The Boeing Company
