How about having the Tuscany namespace extend the SCA one so you can choose to use that as the default namespace so as to avoid having to worry about all the namespace prefixes?
...ant I don't really expect to win this debate now that the issue has been brought up, had just been hoping it wouldn't come up :) On 8/3/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > PITA is a new one on me. I usually use Google to help me in such > cases, but most of the entries near the top of the list are about > a kind of bread :-) > > I don't see this as such a big problem. The average WSDL file > seems to contain at least 3 different namespaces. I think XML > programmers are quite familiar with the need to define additional > namespaces and how to do that. A simple rule that everything > from the SCA spec is in the SCA namespace and everything from > Tuscany SCA is in the Tuscany SCA namespace will help them to know > which namespace they should be using. > > +1 to the suggestion that we produce extremely good diagnostics to > help people who get the namespace wrong. > > Also +1 to the suggestion that we take Tuscany extensions that we > think should be part of the specs to the spec group for their > consideration. However, this does not avoid the need for multiple > namespaces, because at any point in time we should expect to have > some Tuscany extensions to SCA that are not (yet) part of the specs. > This actually reinforces the importance of putting Tuscany extensions > in a Tuscany namespace, because Tuscany's <foo> might get adopted > as SCA's <foo> with subtle differences, and it will then be important > for people to be able to write either <tuscany:foo> or <sca:foo> in > their SCDL and get the correct semantics. > > Simon > > ant elder wrote: > > > This is a real pity IMHO as it makes the SCDL significantly more > > complicated, ugly and error prone, changing this namespace is going to > do > > nothing to help usability. I know line 2535 in the spec is clear, but > the > > actual SCA schema supports doing this doesn't it? Could we just ignore > line > > 2535, or propose all the extensions we have as spec proposals, or > something, > > anything else to avoid this PITA? > > > > At the very least we'll need to hightlight a change like this very > clearly > > in the release notes and website doc on all the extensions, and ensure > > there's a really explicit and helpful error message produced when you > get > > the namespace wrong. > > > > ...ant > > > > On 8/2/07, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>I have reopened the JIRA and will give it a try... > >> > >>On 8/2/07, Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>Folks, > >>> > >>>I agree with Simon's comment - this resolution violates the SCA spec. > >>>You are not supposed to go adding stuff to the SCA namespace that is > not > >>>approved by the SCA spec process. In particular, no additions to the > >>>sca.xsd or sca-core.xsd are allowed. > >>> > >>>Yours, Mike. > >>> > >>>ant elder (JIRA) wrote: > >>> > >>>> [ > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1053?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel > ] > >> > >>>>ant elder closed TUSCANY-1053. > >>>>------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>> Resolution: Fixed > >>>> > >>>>Closing as it looks like we've standardized on using the SCA namespace > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Use a Tuscany namespace for all non-spec'd Tuscany extensions > >>>>>------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>> > >>>>> Key: TUSCANY-1053 > >>>>> URL: > >> > >>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1053 > >> > >>>>> Project: Tuscany > >>>>> Issue Type: Improvement > >>>>> Components: Java SCA Assembly Model > >>>>> Affects Versions: Java-SCA-Next > >>>>> Reporter: ant elder > >>>>> Assignee: ant elder > >>>>> Fix For: Java-SCA-Next > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Currently Tsucany extensions use SCDL elements is varrious different > >> > >>namespaces. There should be a single Tuscany namespace that extensions > not > >>defined by SCA spec's should use. See > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200701.mbox/[EMAIL > PROTECTED] > >> > >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >>-- > >>Luciano Resende > >>Apache Tuscany Committer > >>http://people.apache.org/~lresende > >>http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
