Re: URI comparison

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 Monday, 24 July 2006 14:03:18 UTC