W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > July 2002

RE: Comments on SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 15:54:24 -0700
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D082CCD22@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>


I don't have a big problem having a SOAP fault subcode for SOAP role
URIs being too long but I would like to clarify that the text in SOAP
1.2 is qualified on the notion that a SOAP node MUST be able to handle
any URIs that it publishes and I think it is reasonable to say that a
role URI is "published" by a SOAP node. This MAY be more than 2k
characters (not bytes). Other length limitations may apply to other URIs
carried in SOAP, this is outside the scope of SOAP itself.

Henrik

>5) Comment: Length of URIs.
>
>I remember a somewhat long discussion on xml-dist-app about that and
>am still unsure about what we should say, but the following statement
>struck me[8]:
>
>|   SOAP does not place any a priori limit on the length of a URI. Any
>|   SOAP node MUST be able to handle the length of any URI that it
>|   publishes and both SOAP senders and SOAP receivers SHOULD 
>be able to
>|   deal with URIs of at least 2048 characters in length.
>
>Even though the URI specification doesn't specify any limit on the
>length of a URI, the HTTP spec does provide a URI too long error
>code[9].
>
>2kB is identified here as a reasonable value to be able to handle.
>This seems to be an architectural issue, a Web services one as well as
>a Web one. I am afraid that such a statement will have a big impact on
>software designed.
>
>I think that I would be more comfortable by saying that software
>should be able to handle URIs of arbitrary length, and that a
>2kB-length is seen _in SOAP's context_ as a minimum value to support.
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 18:55:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:01 GMT