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

ISSUE-32 (Protocol-2015 too vague): Protocol-2015 too vaguely worded, probably unnecessary [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

From: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:57:12 +0000 (GMT)
To: public-soap-jms@w3.org
Message-Id: <20100315235712.6FFAF6B646@tibor.w3.org>

ISSUE-32 (Protocol-2015 too vague): Protocol-2015 too vaguely worded, probably unnecessary [SOAP-JMS Binding specification]

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/32

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

At the moment, Protocol-2015 (http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#Protocol-2015)

states: "The contentType parameter MUST reflect the value specified in the Content-type part header for the first part (the SOAP body, so text/xml or application/xop+xml)"

Items:
#1) Vague: "reflect" is a completely vague word with unclear meaning.

#2) Incorrect: "first part" - should the message be MIME multi-part, the "first part" could be a binary attachment - it does not need to be the actual SOAP message (as we've discussed in previous conference calls and email threads)

#3) Incomplete: "so text/xml or..." - is an incomplete list of possibilities, but its presence in a normative statement implies it is exhaustive.

Particularly on the last item (#3), I don't see that it is actually useful to be exhaustive - if someone comes up with a new SOAP specification that somehow affects the "contentType" parameter, it would be better for everyone if our spec is not overly prescriptive.

Proposal:

Remove the normative statement, as it is not clarifying anything, and it isn't adding any useful normative requirements.
Received on Monday, 15 March 2010 23:57:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:16:23 GMT