http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-user&m=114348410608730&w=2
And here's the standard OTA schema which has no targetNamespace:
http://www.opentravel.org/2005B/OTA_SimpleTypes.xsd
(You'd think a standards group would have the sense to define a namespace!)
Anne
On 3/29/06, Dennis Sosnoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 09:01 +1200, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>
>
>
>>Does WSDL 1.1 define QNames somewhere to require prefixes? This
>>certainly isn't standard usage of the schema QName type. Schema
>>considers QNames with no prefix to be using the default namespace for
>>the context.
>>
>>
>
>No, WSDL doesn't define that IIRC. However, when it uses the default
>namespace then its still a qualified name. So if the schema is
>targetnamespace-less then it still can't be referred to.
>
>Am I missing something?
>
>
As long as there's no default namespace declared in the WSDL unqualified
values are in the nonamespace namespace, the same as schema definitions
with no targetNamespace. So references from the WSDL into the schema
definitions are not a problem.
- Dennis
