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

RE: issue 168 proposal: xsi:type of external references in Encoding

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:11:42 +0100 (CET)
To: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
cc: Noah Mendelsohn <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, xml-dist-app <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112102105460.9926-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 Andrew,
 we are talking about SOAP Encoding, which describes (and
defines) the semantics of the href attribute, therefore we should
make exactly such normative statements about the attribute's
value resolving.
 We are not trying to make statements about any general URI
references present in SOAP messages. Even SOAP-Encoding-encoded
data can contain URI references whose semantics depend on the
application, like the following RPC example:

 <env:Body
        encodingStyle="http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-encoding">
   <m:resolveTheReference xmlns:m="urn:example-resolver">
     <theURI xsi:type="xsd:anyURI">
        http://foo.bar.com/blah
     </theURI>
     <controlFlag xsi:type="xsd:boolean">
        false
     </controlFlag><!-- no, don't really do it -->
   </m:resolveTheReference>
 </env:Body>

 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
                   http://www.systinet.com/



On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Andrew Layman wrote:

 > Can we make such normative statements universally about URI reference
 > processing or should processing depend on the semantics of the message?
 > I think the latter.
 >
 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: Noah Mendelsohn [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com]
 > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:06 AM
 > To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek
 > Cc: xml-dist-app
 > Subject: Re: issue 168 proposal: xsi:type of external references in
 > Encoding
 >
 >
 > As I've suggested before, I think there are issues relating to external
 > references that go beyond the encodings, and I think our approach has to
 > be
 > consistent across the cases.  If I send you a document that uses
 > encoding
 > and has an href to some other URL, what are my obligations in following
 > that link?  It has very bad performance and security implications if you
 > even imply that a conforming implementation MUST try to open a random
 > URL
 > that happens to show up in the href of a document.
 >
 > This also relates to our handling of SOAP+Attachments and DIME, which I
 > think we've delayed for now.
 >
 > So, we need to indicate in the encodings, what is the result if there is
 > an
 > href you choose not to follow or can't follow?  Is it that a fault
 > should
 > be generated?  Is it the same fault as if an href in the form of a
 > fragment
 > referencing the envelope itself fails?  Thanks.
 >
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
 > Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
 > One Rogers Street
 > Cambridge, MA 02142
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 >
Received on Monday, 10 December 2001 15:11:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 22:28:13 UTC