W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > March 2007

RE: LocationTemplate-1G test

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:05:28 -0700
To: "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jonathan@wso2.com>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004701c765cc$7a2928c0$6e7b7a40$@com>

FTR, the Working Group this issue as a CR157 [1], and fixed it in the latest
editor's draft [2].

I agree with the resolution.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR157
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html
?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#_http_operation_location_cited_ser

Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh
> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:01 PM
> To: 'Youenn Fablet'; 'keith chapman'
> Cc: 'www-ws-desc'
> Subject: RE: LocationTemplate-1G test
> 
> 
> Summarizing this thread, this morning's discussion, and the related
> issues:
> 
> - [FIXED] * was improperly encoded in the baseline.
> 
> - [QUESTION 1] The spec says what characters MUST be encoded, but there
> are
> also characters that MAY be encoded such as * (and pretty much any other
> character except %).  Our test suite assumes only the characters that MUST
> be are.  Should we change this?  (I think we should do this
> opportunistically, that is, if a testcase is proven to be correct, we
> simply
> add an alternative that matches that implementation's encoding strategy.
> I
> don't think we have any failures because of this at present.)
> 
> - [AGREED] Per the last paragraph of 6.8.1, referencing section 3.1 of RFC
> 3987, some further encoding is performed after the http location templates
> are resolved and combined with the {address} property.
> 
> - [QUESTION 2] Is this sufficiently clear in the spec?  (I think so.)
> 
> - [AGREED] Besides the extended characters encoded above, the spec says
> implementations SHOULD also encode "<", ">", '"', space, "{", "}", "|",
> "\",
> "^", and "`".  Our test suite will currently assume this SHOULD has been
> followed.
> 
> - [FIXED] There other editorial improvements such as removing the double
> negative, reordering bullets, removing query parameter separator from
> consideration before the "?".
> 
> - [QUESTION 3] Are there additional editorial improvements possible?  (I
> think so, as reported in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0193.html).
> 
> - [QUESTION 4] Is "&" a harmful character before the "?".  If not, we
> should
> add it to the excluded list.
> 
> - [QUESTION 5] Are ";" and "=" harmful characters before the "?".  If so,
> we
> should remove them from the excluded list.
> 
> I'll research proposals for 4 and 5 per my AI, but if there are any other
> questions I didn't capture here, let us know!
> 
> Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com -
> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
> > Behalf Of Youenn Fablet
> > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:35 AM
> > To: keith chapman
> > Cc: www-ws-desc
> > Subject: Re: LocationTemplate-1G test
> >
> >
> > +1
> > If we have a location="?path={value1}&uri={value2}", the intent of the
> > specification is that '&' is sent as is in the url.
> > Some characters (the non-ascii ones for instance) must of course be
> > encoded to form a correct URL.
> > Some text may be missing in the specification to describe this
> precisely.
> >     Youenn
> >
> >
> > keith chapman wrote:
> > > Even option 1 does not speak of encoding the httplocation. It only
> > > speaks of encoding instance data. This raises the issue, should the
> > > location template itself be encoded?
> > >
> > > If we say the location template itself will be encoded then the user
> > > wont hav an option of sending unencoded stuff in the url (unless
> > > through templating). But if we send it raw as it is then the user can
> > > do anything he wants.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Keith.
> > >
> > > On 2/22/07, *Jean-Jacques Moreau* <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr
> > > <mailto:jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>> wrote:
> > >
> > >     Comments inline.
> > >
> > >     keith chapman wrote:
> > >     > See comments inline
> > >     >
> > >     > On 2/22/07, *Jonathan Marsh* < jonathan@wso2.com
> > >     <mailto:jonathan@wso2.com>
> > >     > <mailto:jonathan@wso2.com <mailto:jonathan@wso2.com>>> wrote:
> > >     >
> > >     >     I thought so too a couple of days ago, but then I found this
> > in
> > >     >     6.8.1.1 <http://6.8.1.1> <http://6.8.1.1>:
> > >     >
> > >     >         * Percent-encoding MUST be performed using the UTF-8
> > >     >           representation of the character as prescribed by
> > >     section 6.4
> > >     >           of [/ IETF RFC 3987
> > >     >
> > >
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-
> > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#RFC3987%23RFC3987
> > >
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-
> > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-
> > 8#RFC3987%23RFC3987>>/].
> > >     >
> > >     > My understanding of this was that it specifies  the encoding
> > >     mechanism
> > >     > to be used, when encoding is performed.  I think wat it says is
> > that
> > >     > instance data that is encoded should be encoded it in this way.
> It
> > >     > does not say anything about encoding the httplocation itself.
> > >     Yes, this is how the spec was meant to be interpreted (and how I
> > >     understood the resolution to CR117). However, since the resolution
> > is
> > >     Jonathan's option 1 [1] in the first place, we should probably do
> > >     as he
> > >     suggests.
> > >
> > >     Jonathan, shall I go make this more explicit in the spec?
> > >
> > >     JJ.
> > >
> > >     [1]
> > >     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Feb/0039.html
> > >     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-
> desc/2007Feb/0039.html>
> > >     >
> > >     >     Section 6.4 is where I got the list of characters to be
> > >     encoded in
> > >     >     my earlier mail.
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >     I actually do think we should be encoding characters in the
> > >     >     template before we stick it in a message that takes a URI
> > >     (if the
> > >     >     message were to take an IRI that would be different, but
> AIUI
> > a
> > >     >     URI goes in the message in SOAP/HTTP).
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >     **Jonathan Marsh** - http://www.wso2.com
> <http://www.wso2.com>
> > -
> > >     >     http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     ------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > ----
> > >     >
> > >     >     *From:* keith chapman [mailto:keithgchapman@gmail.com
> > >     <mailto:keithgchapman@gmail.com>
> > >     >     <mailto:keithgchapman@gmail.com
> > >     <mailto:keithgchapman@gmail.com>>]
> > >     >     *Sent:* Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:03 PM
> > >     >     *To:* Jonathan Marsh
> > >     >     *Cc:* Youenn Fablet; www-ws-desc
> > >     >
> > >     >     *Subject:* Re: LocationTemplate-1G test
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >     Hi Jonathan and all,
> > >     >
> > >     >     Section 6.8.1.1 <http://6.8.1.1> <http://6.8.1.1> [1] in
> > >     adjuncts does not speak of
> > >     >     encoding characters from the httpLocation it self. As I
> > >     understood
> > >     >     encoding is performed ONLY on the instance data which
> replaces
> > >     >     templates. In that case I dont think that {{4(^$@!}}4^@*}}
> > [2]
> > >     >     should be encoded. Afterall its the arthor of the web
> > >     services who
> > >     >     sticks in the httpLocation. May be he wanted to send those
> > >     >     characters as it is in the URL. He should be aware of it. I
> > dont
> > >     >     think that we should be encoding the characters in the
> > template.
> > >     >
> > >     >     Should we make this clear in the spec or have
> > >     I  misunderstood it?
> > >     >
> > >     >     [1]
> > >     >
> > >     http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-
> > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-
> > 8#_http_operation_location_cited_ser
> > >
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-
> > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-
> > 8#_http_operation_location_cited_ser>
> > >     >
> > >
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-
> > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-
> > 8#_http_operation_location_cited_ser
> > >
> <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-
> > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-
> > 8#_http_operation_location_cited_ser>>
> > >     >
> > >     >     [2] datespace/{year}.html?passphrase={time}{{4(^$@!}}4^@*}}
> > >     >
> > >     >     Thanks,
> > >     >     Keith.
> > >     >
> > >     >     On 2/21/07, *Jonathan Marsh* < jonathan@wso2.com
> > >     <mailto:jonathan@wso2.com>
> > >     >     <mailto:jonathan@wso2.com <mailto:jonathan@wso2.com>>>
> wrote:
> > >     >
> > >     >     I looked into message 13 there.  The location template in
> that
> > >     >     testcase is:
> > >     >
> > >     >        datespace/{year}.html?passphrase={time}{{4(^$@!}}4^@*}}
> > >     >
> > >     >     This testcase test not only that templates are encoded, but
> > that
> > >     >     the IRI is
> > >     >     correctly converted to a URI per RFC3987.  Many characters
> > over
> > >     >     #xA0 are
> > >     >     %-encoded, as well as "<", ">", '"', space, "{", "}", "|",
> > "\",
> > >     >     "^", and
> > >     >     "`".
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > datespace/2006.html?passphrase=16:40:00%7B4(%5E$@!%7D4%5E@*%7D
> > >     >
> > >     >     Indeed the "*" should have been omitted from the list of
> > >     >     characters encoded
> > >     >     during this conversion.  I've updated the expected results,
> > >     >     putting Canon at
> > >     >     all green on this testcase.  Axis2 still fails the testcase
> > >     because it
> > >     >     doesn't seem to be doing the encoding listed above at all.
> > >     >
> > >     >     Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com -
> > >     >     http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >     > -----Original Message-----
> > >     >     > From: Youenn Fablet [mailto: youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr
> > >     <mailto:youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>
> > >     >     <mailto:youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr
> > >     <mailto:youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>>]
> > >     >     > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:31 AM
> > >     >     > To: keith chapman
> > >     >     > Cc: www-ws-desc; Jonathan Marsh
> > >     >     > Subject: Re: LocationTemplate-1G test
> > >     >     >
> > >     >     > Here is canon location template 1G result.
> > >     >     > There is one red (request 13).
> > >     >     > It seems that our implementation is not %-encoding the '*'
> > >     character
> > >     >     > while the test framework wants it to be %-encoded.
> > >     >     > As per the current draft, '*' is not in the
> > >     must-be-encoded set.
> > >     >     > An application may therefore typically choose to %-encode
> > >     it or not,
> > >     >     > right?
> > >     >     > The test framework should only check that must-be-%-
> encoded
> > >     >     characters
> > >     >     > are correctly encoded and nothing more.
> > >     >     > I do not know whether this is easily feasible in the
> > >     current test
> > >     >     > framework though.
> > >     >     >     Youenn
> > >     >     >
> > >     >     > keith chapman wrote:
> > >     >     > >
> > >     >     > > Hi Jonathan,
> > >     >     > >
> > >     >     > > Request 11 shows red due to a mistake in the test
> > >     framework. You
> > >     >     > > forgot to add 000Z to one time element...
> > >     >     > >
> > >     >     > > Thanks,
> > >     >     > > Keith.
> > >     >     > > --
> > >     >     > > Keith Chapman
> > >     >     > > WSO2 Inc.
> > >     >     > > Oxygen for Web Services Developers.
> > >     >     > > http://wso2.org/
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >     --
> > >     >     Keith Chapman
> > >     >     WSO2 Inc.
> > >     >     Oxygen for Web Services Developers.
> > >     >     http://wso2.org/ <http://wso2.org/>
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     >
> > >     > --
> > >     > Keith Chapman
> > >     > WSO2 Inc.
> > >     > Oxygen for Web Services Developers.
> > >     > http://wso2.org/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Keith Chapman
> > > WSO2 Inc.
> > > Oxygen for Web Services Developers.
> > > http://wso2.org/
> 
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 00:04:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:33 GMT