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

Re: Issue 221 resolution text change

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 12:39:25 -0400
To: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, W3C Archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFFE3E9F51.F63DD2E4-ON85256C2B.005A7FA8@lotus.com>

I think this is generally good, but I'm uncomfortable with the change to 
initial SOAP sender.  An intermediary can wind up sending PI's in at least 
two ways, potentially:

* In relayed content, for which we've agreed to allow wiggle room
* In newly inserted headers, for which we allow no such lattitude.

I therefore think that we need to go back to something like:

Except in the special case of content relayed by intermediaries (see 
below), SOAP messages sent by SOAP senders MUST NOT contain processing 
instruction information items. 

...or some such.  If one wanted to be even more explicit, at the risk of 
being verbose, one could also go with:

"However, in the case where performance considerations make it impractical 
for an 
intermediary to detect processing instruction information items in a 
message to be relayed, such intermediaries MAY leave the processing 
instruction information items unchanged in the relayed message.   SOAP intemediaries
MUST NOT include PIs in headers inserted by the intermediary."

So, I really want to make it clear that there's no wiggle room for 
allowing PI's in new content by any sender, otherwise the whole change 
we've just made is a waste of time.   Otherwise, I like what you've done, 
and would be happy with any reasonable variation that deals with the 
remaining concern.  Many thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------







Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
09/05/2002 10:02 AM

 
        To:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
        cc:     Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, Jean-Jacques Moreau 
<moreau@crf.canon.fr>, W3C Archive <www-archive@w3.org>
        Subject:        Issue 221 resolution text change


Noah,

I have incorporated the resolution to issue 221. In doing so I have 
modified your proposed text as follows:

Original:
"Except in the special case of intermediaries (see below), envelopes
transmitted by SOAP senders MUST NOT contain PIs.

Receivers (including intermediaries)  receiving an envelope with a PI
SHOULD fault with a XXXX fault.  However, in the case where performance
considerations make it impractical for an intermediary to detect PIs in 
a
message to be relayed, such intermediaries MAY leave the PIs unchanged 
in
the relayed message."

New:
"SOAP messages sent by initial SOAP senders MUST NOT contain processing 
instruction information items. SOAP receivers receiving a SOAP message 
containing a processing instruction information item SHOULD generate a 
SOAP fault with the Value of Code set to "env:Sender". However, in the 
case where performance considerations make it impractical for an 
intermediary to detect processing instruction information items in a 
message to be relayed, such intermediaries MAY leave the processing 
instruction information items unchanged in the relayed message."

The main changes were associated with use of terminology from section 
1.4:

(i) envelope->message to make sure people don't think they can prefix 
the envelope with a PIII since that is not 'in' the envelope

(ii) use of 'initial SOAP sender' instead of 'SOAP sender but not 
intermediaries'

(iii) expansion of PI to processing instruction information item.

(iv) reference to sender fault made consistent with the rest of the 
spec.

I hope you agree that the changes do not affect the semantics or 
general spirit of the issue resolution. Please let me know if you 
disapprove.

Regards,
Marc.

--
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
XML Technology Center, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 12:40:46 GMT

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