On 25 Apr, 16:19, cem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25 Apr, 07:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On 24 Apr, 22:22, cem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > One of our long-running bugs ishttp://pecl.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=8428,
> > > where a remote WSDL depends for its type definitions on an import like
> > > so:
> > > <types>
> > > <xsd:schema targetNamespace="urn:UrbanSearch">
> > > <xsd:import namespace="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"/>
> > > ...
> > Well it seems to be a valid XML in the WSDL types section so It would
> > be interesting to know where this is actually going wrong. The xml
> > schema import processing should be following a process (loosely)
> > defined in section 4.3.2 of the xml schema spec . So here, is it
> > the case that the import is being processed by libxml2 and not being
> > translated into SDO types successfully or is it the case that the
> > import is not being picked up at all?
> libxml2 is not honouring the import, but it's not bothered as I don't
> think it is being asked to validate the schema, only that it is well-
> formed (which it is). Then Tuscany also processes the import during
> its defineTypes() processing - it also does not honour the import but
> that leaves it with unresolved types.
> Anyway, I've subsequently found (by reading the code) that an unknown
> Tuscany developer did actually put the fix back in as optional
> behaviour but didn't update the defect to say so. So everything is
> rosy in the xml schema garden.
Cool - so does that mean we have it in the branch. Or do we need to
take another cut of Tuscany SDO?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at