W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2001

Re: Proposed text for XML Base support in SOAP 1.2

From: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 16:00:46 +0000
Message-ID: <3C0E44AE.6030004@sun.com>
To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Forgive me if I have this wrong, but the proposed text doesn't say that 
we support XML base which is what I thought we agreed to. Instead it 
only says we support RFC 2396 which is different - no xml:base attribute 
for one thing !

Also there is some text that is copied almost verbatim from the XML base 
specification - wouldn't it be better to just refer to the original ?


Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> Here is the proposed text for support of XML base as agreed upon in [1] 
> based on proposal [2]. I have expanded the description to talk a little 
> about how SOAP 1.2 deals with URIs in general in order to avoid 
> problems later on. 
> Comments?
> Henrik
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues#x134
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Oct/0258.html
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *EdNote 1:* This text is to be inserted as a section in SOAP 1.2 Part 1. 
> The "X" references should be substituted with the proper references in 
> the SOAP 1.2 specification.
> *EdNote 2:* I suggest that we as part of the internationalization 
> considerations for SOAP 1.2 refer to XML Base for how to deal with 
> escaping URIs.
> *EdNote 3:* We should ensure that protocol binding framework includes a 
> note saying that bindings must indicate whether they define a base URI 
> or not.
> *EdNote 4:* We might want to consider introducing a "URITooLong" SOAP 
> fault code
>   Use of URIs in SOAP
> SOAP uses URIs for some identifies including but not limited to as 
> values of the "encodingStyle" (see section X.X) and "actor" (see section 
> X.X) attribute information items. To SOAP, a URI is simply a formatted 
> string that identifies?via name, location, or any other characteristic?a 
> resource on the Web.
> Although this section only applies to URIs directly used by information 
> items defined by SOAP, it is RECOMMENDED but not required that 
> application-defined data carried within a SOAP envelope uses the same 
> mechanisms and guidelines defined here for handling URIs.
> URIs used as values in information items identified by the 
> "http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-envelope" and 
> "http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-encoding" XML namespaces can be either 
> relative or absolute. In addition, URIs used as values of the local, 
> unqualified "href" attribute information item can be relative or absolute.
> SOAP does not define a base URI but relies on the mechanisms defined in 
> RFC 2396 (see [X], section 5.1) and referred to in XML Base (see [X], 
> section 4.1) for establishing a base URI against which relative URIs can 
> be made absolute. The rules can non-normatively be summarized as follows 
> (highest priority to lowest):
>    1. The base URI is embedded in the document's content.
>    2. The base URI is that of the encapsulating entity (message,
>       document, or none).
>    3. The base URI is the URI used to retrieve the entity.
>    4. The base URI is defined by the context of the application.
> *Note:* The term "entity" in points #2 and #3 above uses the RFC 2396 
> and not the XML meaning of the term.
> The underlying protocol binding MAY define a base URI which can act as 
> the base URI in points #2 or #3 (see section X.X and the HTTP binding in 
> section X.X).
> SOAP does not define any equivalence rules for URIs in general as these 
> are defined by the individual URI schemes and by RFC 2396. However, 
> because of inconsistencies with respect to URI equivalence rules in many 
> current URI parsers, it is RECOMMENDED that SOAP senders do not rely on 
> any special equivalence rules in SOAP receivers in order to determine 
> equivalence between URI values used in a SOAP message.
> The use of IP addresses in URIs SHOULD be avoided whenever possible (see 
> RFC 1900). However, when used, the literal format for IPv6 addresses in 
> URI's as described by RFC 2732 SHOULD be supported.
> 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 8k in length.

Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2001 11:03:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:17 UTC