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

Re: Issue 135 - Re: discarding incorrect namespaces

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:44:53 -0500
To: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: hugo@w3.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF4FAA08F5.92CC138D-ON85256B02.005CA1D3@lotus.com>
(RESEND...  not sure why the carriage returns were messed up in the first 
copy of this.  Hope this one is better.  Sorry for any confusion.  NRM)

Shouldn't we clarify that treating NS mismatch as version errors applies 
only to the particular constructs of our specification?  If I send you a 
header entry with a bad NS, that might very well be a mustUnderstand 
error, for example.   I think we should be absolutely unambiguous as to 
where a NS mismatch is a version error. 

More specifically, we should be clear on at least the following (presuming 

SOAP-ENV is the correct SOAP 1.2 NS prefix):

1.      <SOAP-ENV: Envelope> <!-- presumably OK>

2.      <OTHERNS:Envelope> <!-- version mismatch>

3.      (as root of message infoset):
        <OTHERNS:EmployeeRecord> <!-- version mismatch or misformed SOAP 
header -->

4.      <SOAP-ENV: Envelope2> <!-- good NS, version mismatch anyway?>

Similarly for Body, Header, Encoding values, etc.  We need to be careful 
to cover any case that a reader of the spec might _think_ is a ns 
mismatch, I think.  Thank you. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 12 November 2001 11:55:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:04 GMT