Re: Fwd: XML Protocol WG's Last Call for Review of SOAP 1.2

I've been looking at SOAP Encoding <-> RDF mappings. Unless anyone else
leaps forward, I'd be happy to work on Last Call review of SOAP 1.2,
hopefully with participation from others on the WG. I also need to ping
the RDF IG folk. Can we have a brief agenda slot for this on friday?

Dan

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Brian McBride wrote:

>
>
> >Resent-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 12:34:59 -0400 (EDT)
> >To: chairs@w3.org
> >X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7  March 21, 2001
> >From: "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>
> >Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 09:33:42 -0700
> >X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM005/03/M/IBM(Release 5.0.10
> >|March 22, 2002) at
> >  06/26/2002 10:34:50 AM
> >Subject: XML Protocol WG's Last Call for Review of SOAP 1.2
> >Resent-From: chairs@w3.org
> >X-Mailing-List: <chairs@w3.org> archive/latest/2006
> >X-Loop: chairs@w3.org
> >Sender: chairs-request@w3.org
> >Resent-Sender: chairs-request@w3.org
> >List-Id: <chairs.w3.org>
> >List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:chairs-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> >
> >
> >----- Forwarded by David Fallside/Santa Teresa/IBM on 06/26/2002 09:33 AM
> >-----
> >|---------+---------------------------->
> >|         |           David Fallside   |
> >|         |                            |
> >|         |           06/26/2002 09:32 |
> >|         |           AM               |
> >|         |                            |
> >|---------+---------------------------->
> >
> >  >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >   |
> >                                                    |
> >   |       To:       xml-dist-app@w3.org
> >                                                    |
> >   |       cc:
> >                                                    |
> >   |       From:     David Fallside/Santa
> > Teresa/IBM@IBMUS
> > |
> >   |       Subject:  XML Protocol WG's Last Call for Review of SOAP
> > 1.2                                                      |
> >   |
> >                                                    |
> >   |
> >                                                    |
> >
> >  >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >
> >
> >
> >====
> >I. This is the last call announcement from the XML Protocol Working Group
> >(XMLP WG) for review of the SOAP Version 1.2 specification.
> >
> >====
> >II. Request for Document Reviews.
> >
> >The XMLP WG asks for reviews of the following five documents:
> >
> >-- SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer [1]
> >Abstract. "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer is a non-normative document
> >intended to provide an easily understandable tutorial on the features of
> >the SOAP Version 1.2 specifications. In particular, it describes the
> >features through various usage scenarios, and is intended to complement the
> >normative text contained in Part 1 and Part 2 of the SOAP 1.2
> >specifications."
> >
> >-- SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework [2]
> >Abstract. "SOAP Version 1.2 is a lightweight protocol intended for
> >exchanging structured information in a decentralized, distributed
> >environment. "Part 1: Messaging Framework" defines, using XML technologies,
> >an extensible messaging framework containing a message construct that can
> >be exchanged over a variety of underlying protocols."
> >
> >-- SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts [3]
> >Abstract. "SOAP Version 1.2 is a lightweight protocol intended for
> >exchanging structured information in a decentralized, distributed
> >environment. SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts defines a set of adjuncts
> >that may be used with SOAP Version 1.2 Part1: Messaging Framework. This
> >specification depends on SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework."
> >
> >-- The "application/soap+xml" media type [4]
> >Abstract. "This document defines the "application/soap+xml" media type
> >which can be used to describe SOAP 1.2 messages serialized as XML."
> >The XMLP WG asks for review of the media type document with the same level
> >of priority as the other documents in section II; see section IV for a
> >statement of the WG's intentions with regard the media type document.
> >
> >-- SOAP Version 1.2 Specification Assertions and Test Collection [5]
> >Abstract. "This document draws on assertions found in the SOAP Version 1.2
> >specifications, and provides a set of tests in order to show whether the
> >assertions are implemented in a SOAP processor.
> >
> >A SOAP 1.2 implementation that passes all of the tests specified in this
> >document may claim to conform to the SOAP 1.2 Test Suite, 2002/06/26. It is
> >incorrect to claim to be compliant with the SOAP Version 1.2 specifications
> >merely by passing successfully all the tests provided in this test suite.
> >It is also incorrect to claim that an implementation is non complaint with
> >the SOAP Version 1.2 specifications based on its failure to pass one or
> >more of the tests in this test suite."
> >
> >All comments on any of these documents should be sent to
> >xmlp-comments@w3.org. Please make sure that comments include document- and,
> >if appropriate, section-references. The appropriate forum for discussion of
> >any of these documents is the public W3C xml-dist-app mailing list [6].
> >
> >====
> >III. Other documents.
> >
> >-- The XMLP WG is publishing "SOAP Version 1.2 Email Binding" (Note) [7] as
> >an example of how to write a binding using the SOAP framework. Comments on
> >this document (to xmlp-comments@w3.org) are welcome although the XMLP WG
> >may not respond to comments on this document.
> >
> >-- The XMLP WG plans to publish a document (probably as a W3C Note)
> >describing an Attachment Feature. This document will be started during the
> >Last Call period and should be completed before SOAP 1.2 becomes a
> >Recommendation.
> >
> >-- For the purpose of providing background information, the XMLP WG is
> >publishing its Requirements [8] and Usage Scenarios [9] documents. No
> >review of these documents is sought.
> >
> >====
> >IV. XMLP WG Intentions.
> >
> >-- Note the following statement regarding XMLP WG's intentions for the W3C
> >Recommendation track. The statement appears in the Status sections of the
> >SOAP 1.2 Parts 0, 1, 2, and Assertions and Test Collection documents
> >[1][2][3][5],
> >"Following completion of Last Call, the XML Protocol Working Group has
> >agreed to advance the specification according to four exit criteria:
> >1. Sufficient reports of implementation experience have been gathered to
> >demonstrate that SOAP processors based on the specification are
> >implementable and have compatible behavior.
> >2. An implementation report shows that there are at least two different and
> >interoperable implementations of every mandatory and optional feature.
> >3. Formal responses to all comments received by the Working Group.
> >4. If these criteria are met, the specification will advance to Proposed
> >Recommendation. If the implementation exit criteria are not met then the
> >specification will enter a Candidate Recommendation phase to ensure they
> >are met."
> >
> >-- Note the following statement regarding XMLP WG's intentions for "The
> >"application/soap+xml" media type" document [4]. The statement appears in
> >the Status sections of SOAP 1.2 Parts 1 and 2 [2][3],
> >"This document references "The 'application/soap+xml' media type" Internet
> >Draft which defines the "application/soap+xml" media type. The XML Protocol
> >Working Group intends to use in an IANA application to register the
> >"application/soap+xml" media type. The Working Group also intends to
> >incorporate the technical content of into a near future version of SOAP
> >Version 1.2 Part 2, and to maintain that content as part of the SOAP
> >specification."
> >
> >====
> >V. Implementation Experience.
> >The XMLP WG seeks feedback on the SOAP 1.2 specification based on
> >experience gained from implementing the specification. More specifically,
> >the WG is interested in which features of the specification have been
> >implemented, whether implemented features have interoperated with other
> >implementations of those features. The WG asks implementers to send their
> >feedback to xmlp-comments@w3.org, and it maintains a web page [10] for
> >summarizing and tracking such feedback.
> >
> >====
> >VI. The Last Call review period ends at 5p Pacific Time, 19 July 2002.
> >
> >====
> >VII. The following W3C Working Groups are especially invited to provide
> >review comments:
> >
> >-- I18N
> >-- QA
> >-- Semantic Web Activity (WG's therein)
> >-- TAG
> >-- Web Services Architecture
> >-- Web Services Description
> >-- XForms
> >-- XKMS
> >-- XML Core
> >-- XML Encryption
> >-- XML Schema
> >-- XML Signature
> >
> >====
> >VIII. Patent Disclosures.
> >
> >A listing and summary of the IPR statements by XMLP WG members is available
> >[11].
> >
> >====
> >IX. The XMLP WG's decision to request Last Call is minuted at [12]
> >
> >====
> >X. References.
> >
> >[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part0
> >[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1
> >[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2
> >[4]
> >http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/18/draft-baker-soap-media-reg-01.txt
> >[5] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-testcollection
> >[6] xml-dist-app@w3.org
> >[7] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-email
> >[8] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlp-reqs
> >[9] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlp-scenarios
> >[10] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/03/soap1.2implementation.html
> >[11] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/17-IPR-statements.html
> >[12] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/12-minutes.html
> >
> >..............................................................
> >David C. Fallside
> >Chair, XML Protocol Working Group
> >Tel: 530.477.7169
> >fallside@us.ibm.com
>

Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 14:06:44 UTC