W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > July 2010

ISSUE-48 (unflagged message body assertions): Unflagged assertions about message body and content type [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

From: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 17:31:25 +0000
To: public-soap-jms@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1OZokv-0004Dn-0p@nelson.w3.org>

ISSUE-48 (unflagged message body assertions): Unflagged assertions about message body and content type  [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/48

Raised by: Eric Johnson
On product: SOAP-JMS Binding specification

>From email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Jul/0013.html

Section 2.4: Four "MUST" statements not flagged as normative assertions:
First pair: "Based on the sending node's use of SOAP 1.1, SOAP 1.2, SOAP Messages with Attachments, and MTOM, the contentType  property MUST be set as it would be for SOAP/HTTP, and the message body MUST use the corresponding format. "

Second pair: "For example, if the SOAP payload is formatted as a simple SOAP envelope, the contentType  property value MUST be specified as "text/xml" for SOAP 1.1 or "application/soap+xml" for SOAP 1.2. On the other hand, if the SOAP payload is formatted as a MIME multipart message, the contentType  property value MUST be specified as "multipart/related". "

The above are not flagged as normative assertions.

In addition, the assertions about the contentType property are more appropriate to put with the definition of that property, and stated somewhat differently from what is already under the definition for that property.

Proposal:
Overall, the easiest way to fix this issue, it seems is to defer to the definition of the "contentType" property.

Details:
Remove the two paragraphs noted above.  Add a new sentence at the beginning of the current paragraph #4 (which currently starts "In this way...") that reads:

The bytes or characters of the JMS Message payload correspond to the MIME format as indicated by the definition of the contentType property.

Also in the same paragraph (#4), for slightly more clarity, replace the words "Note also that" with "Specifically, "
Received on Friday, 16 July 2010 17:31:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:16:24 GMT