W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Editorial issue 261: Choose character encoding UTF8/16

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 11:54:29 +0200
Message-ID: <3D7486D5.5000901@crf.canon.fr>
To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
CC: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>, Nilo Mitra <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, Noah Mendelson <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, W3C Public Archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>

I've implemented your suggested change s/header/header field/. 
Actually, I've swept through the entire spec (part 2) and 
repeated the change where appropriate. (BTW, RFC 2616 is 
inconsistent in its use of header vs. header field.)

I have also fixed replaced [SOAP MediaType] with a reference to 
appendix A, since the IETF draft is now an empty shell and its 
content was moved to this appendix.

+1 to your other proposals.

Jean-Jacques.

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
> Looking at the HTTP binding [2] in part 2, we have two places where the
> serialization is mentioned:
> 
> 1) In Table 15, we say:
> 
> "Rules for carrying SOAP messages in media type "application/soap+xml"
> are given in [SOAP MediaType]."
 >
> 2) In Table 18, we say:
> 
> "The response message is assumed to be a SOAP envelope serialized
> according the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media type given
> in the Content-Type header."
> 
> For the case of "application/soap+xml", charset issues are described in
> [3] as 
> 
> 	charset 
> 
> 	This parameter has identical semantics to the charset
> 	parameter of the "application/xml" media type as specified
> 	in [RFC 3023].
> 
> And in RFC 3023, it is mentioned that 
> 
>       "utf-8" [RFC2279] and "utf-16" [RFC2781] are the recommended
>       values, representing the UTF-8 and UTF-16 charsets, respectively.
>       These charsets are preferred since they are supported by all
>       conforming processors of [XML].
> 
> Other than an editorial change in the text in 2) above to include a
> missing "to" and to say "header field" rather than "header" as in
> 
> "The response message is assumed to be a SOAP envelope serialized
> according to the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media type
> given in the Content-Type header field."
> 
> I think we can close this issue as being appropriately addressed in the
> current text.
> 
> Henrik Frystyk Nielsen 
> mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x261
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part2.html#soapinhttp
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part2.html#ietf-reg
> [4] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 05:54:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:22 GMT