W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > August 2006

Re: URI comparison

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 09:41:23 +0200
To: Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
Cc: Youenn Fablet <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>, www-ws-desc@w3.org, Jeremy Hughes <jpjhughes@gmail.com>
Message-id: <44D05723.8090409@crf.canon.fr>

Roberto Chinnici wrote:
> The URI for SOAP 1.2/HTTP (http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP/)
> is taken straight out of the SOAP 1.2 specification [1].
>
> I can't quite recall why we used a different convention for the
> SOAP 1.1/HTTP binding in [2]. Perhaps Asir can shed some light,
> as the editor of that document?
Perhaps it's an artifact of aging and having been in these WGs for too 
long? (not pointing at anyone in particular, just a reflexion on 
myself). The longer you stay, the more characters you remove at the end; 
like telomeres. Of course one day all URIs will resume to only one 
single character: eternity.

JJ.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/#http-bindname
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-wsdl20-soap11-binding-20060327/
>
> Roberto
>
> Youenn Fablet wrote:
>>
>> We should then check what were the intended URI (with or without '/') 
>> in these documents.
>> I am pretty sure that these are typos, at least for the documents 
>> extracted from the primer (GreatH-1/2/3G...).
>> We should fix the examples in the primer and in the baseline.
>> At this point, I would preferably stick with the 
>> character-by-character comparison, even if it does not ease the 
>> authoring.
>>
>> By the way, I checked in the adjunct specification and the WSDL2.0 
>> SOAP1.1 binding note. We have the following 2 uris:
>>    SOAP1.1/HTTP -> "http://www.w3.org/2006/01/soap11/bindings/HTTP"
>>    SOAP1.2/HTTP -> "http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP/"
>> This may be a little bit confusing to have two cousins URIs, one with 
>> and the other without the slash.
>>    Youenn
>>
>>
>> Jeremy Hughes wrote:
>>> Hi, In Woden we treat them as different URIs (because they are :-)
>>>
>>> I remember a time in WSDL4J (before 1.0) where we tried to treat them
>>> as the same and came up against all manner of headaches.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>> On 7/24/06, Youenn Fablet <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I dug into some of the WSDL documents for which our wsdl parser 
>>>> does not
>>>> match with the baseline.
>>>> Some differences are due to the use in some documents (Echo-1G for
>>>> instance) of the following binding URI:
>>>>        wsoap:protocol="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP"
>>>> Our parser recognizes the use of the SOAP1.2 HTTP binding with the
>>>> following URI:
>>>>        wsoap:protocol="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP/"
>>>> The sole difference is the last character '/'.
>>>> We currently use a simple character-by-character comparison to 
>>>> match the
>>>> URI against the SOAP1.2 binding URI, as defined IIRC somewhere in 
>>>> part 1.
>>>> Arthur, do you know how Woden is handling URI processing and 
>>>> comparison ?
>>>> Regards,
>>>>     Youenn
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2006 07:42:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:41 GMT