It will also help facilitate future automatic processing by WSDL 2
If a Web service requires per client sicuro follow verso particular convention that is likely esatto be automatable per WSDL 2.0 toolkits, then that convention SHOULD be indicated durante the WSDL 2.0 document as a wsdl:required extension, rather than just being conveyed out of band, even if that convention is not currently implemented in WSDL 2.0 toolkits.
This practice will help prevent interoperability problems that could arise if one toolkit requires verso particular convention that is not indicated sopra the WSDL 2.0 document, while another toolkit does not realize that that convention is required. 0 toolkits.
On the other hand, verso client MAY engage an extension that is declared as optional con the WSDL 2.0 document. Therefore, the Web service MUST support every extension that is declared as optional per the WSDL 2.0 document, per accessit onesto supporting every extension that is declared as mandatory. †
If finer-grain, direction-fin control of extensions is desired, then such extensions may be designed per a direction-affective manner (from the client or from the Web service) so that either direction ple, instead of defining verso celibe extension that governs both directions, two extensions could be defined -one for each direction.
Validity of per WSDL 2.0 document can only be assessed within the context of a batteria of supported extensions. Per WSDL 2.0 document that contains verso required but unsupported extension is invalid with respect puro that servizio of supported extensions.
6.1.2 required attribute information item
The type of the required attribute information item is xs:boolean. Its default value is “false” (hence extensions are NOT required by default).
6.2 Attribute-based Extensibility
WSDL 2.0 allows qualified attribute information items whose [namespace name] is NOT “” to appear on any element information item whose namespace name IS “”. Such attribute information items can be used onesto annotate WSDL 2.0 constructs such as interfaces, bindings, etc.
6.3 Extensibility Semantics
As indicated above, it is expected that the presence of extension elements and attributes will result con additional properties appearing per the component model.
The presence of an optional extension element or attribute MAY therefore augment the semantics of per WSDL 2.0 document con ways that do not invalidate the existing semantics. However, the presence of verso mandatory extension element MAY alter the semantics of verso WSDL 2.0 document in ways that invalidate the existing semantics.
Note that, however, once the client and service both know that an optional extension has been engaged (because the service has received per message explicitly engaging that extension, for login sugardaddyforme example), then the semantics of that extension supersede what the WSDL 2.0 document indicated. For example, the WSDL 2.0 document may have specified an XML message lista puro be used, but also indicated an optional security extension that encrypts the messages. If the security extension is engaged, then the encrypted messages will per niente longer conform puro the specified message lista (until they are decrypted).
Authors of extension elements should make sure onesto include con the specification of these elements per clear statement of the requirements for document conformance (see 1.3 Document Conformance).
Authors of extension elements that may manifest as properties of the Description component should be aware of the impact of imports on their extensions, or of their extensions on imports. It is not possible, within the component model, onesto define extensions that have an effective scope equal esatto the scope of a containing file. Extensions that modify the behavior of the components contained per verso description may therefore unexpectedly modify the behavior of components in imported descriptions as well, unless proper care is taken.
