Hi John, My take is that these three assertions are really just a single assertion. If a target namespace is dereferencable it should point to a human or machine processable document.
As far as implementing assertions, let's stick to the MUST assertions (i.e. errors). We can try to work in these optional assertions later. Lawrence John Kaputin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02/14/2008 11:31 AM Please respond to [email protected] To [email protected] cc Subject Questions on Description assertions This is probably a question for Arthur, but I'll accept any takers. The WSDL spec defines these 3 document assertions: Description-1001: The value of the targetNamespace attribute information item SHOULD be dereferencable.? Description-1002: It SHOULD resolve to a human or machine processable document that directly or indirectly defines the intended semantics of those components. ? Description-1003 It MAY resolve to a WSDL 2.0 document that provides service description information for that namespace.? I think I can test the 1001 assertion just by connecting to stream and seeing if I can get something back. I'm not sure how to test 1002 and 1003. For 1002, how to check for the 'intended semantics'? For 1003, the 'WSDL 2.0 document' referred to be the assertion text sounds like the same one I'm trying to validate? Should we just focus on the Error assertions for now (e.g. those that say "MUST"), and just document any Warning assertions ("SHOULD", "MAY") that we ignore? regards, John Kaputin Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
