W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2007

RE: Status: Editorial action items

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:46:19 -0800
To: "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00cb01c751f2$5e8d1bf0$3501a8c0@DELLICIOUS>

> > ----------
> > 5.1: on operation:
> >   whttp:contentCodingDefault="xs:string"?? >
> > Remove the extra ">",
> DONE (for all occurrences in the SOAP binding)
> QUESTION: shouldn't we do this in the HTTP binding as well?

Not sure what you mean - I don't see any typos in the HTTP binding syntax

> >   whttp:queryParameterSeparator="xs:string"?
> >  and I think add a second question mark to the latter.
> >
> DONE (in the SOAP binding)
> QUESTION: same as above.

If you mean the double question marks, the notation is only defined for the
SOAP binding and that's sufficient.

> > ----------
> > RE CR143, should it be whttp:contentCoding or whttp:contentEncoding?  I
> > assumed (and implemented in the test suite) that we'd parallel as
> closely as
> > possible the HTTP Content-Encoding header.  One or the other needs to
> > change...
> >
> The other ;-)
> I've looked at the HTTP/1.1 spec before implementing the resolution. The
> attribute is indeed called "Content-Encoding", but the functionality is
> simply named "content coding". I've used the latter terminology.

Yeah, I'd still prefer to name it after the artifact than after some
terminology in the spec. Also, content-coding is an abstraction for
functionality available through both Transfer-Coding and Content-Encoding.
So one familiar with the term still might not know perfectly which concrete
manifestation we're talking about.  I'm not going to change the test suite
just yet ;-).  Further cogitation required.
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 17:46:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:03 UTC