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

Re: Proposed resolution of issue 101: relationship between header and body blocks

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 17:29:36 +0100 (CET)
To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
cc: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>, <dug@us.ibm.com>, <frystyk@microsoft.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111221722430.15886-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 Jean-Jacques,
 first a question of clarification: what is the meaning of the
'href' attribute on the first header? If that is the Encoding
href reference, the element xx:user must not have any children.
If it is other href, please explain what that means in your
application - it is not readily apparent to me.
 Anyway, in your second example, the second header is targeted at
none so the processing model does _not_ dictate a mustUnderstand
fault.
 On the other hand, the handling of unknown referenced data
depends on the definition of href. Dereferencing the SOAP
Encoding href, for example, never results in generating a
mustUnderstand fault. The ID that is referenced is there, so no
other fault should be generated either.
 So my answer is "let's not mix the processing model terms
(mustUnderstand and actor and targetting) with the encoding terms
(references) because they are on different levels and should not
affect each other."
 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

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



On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:

 > [Ok, no reaction, so let's try this again with a concrete
 > example.]
 >
 > In the following example, the "next" SOAP node will fault if it
 > does not understand "xx:user":
 >   <envelope>
 >     <header>
 >       <xx:user
 >           mU="true"
 >           href="#example.org"
 >           actor="next"><name>fred</name></xx:user>
 >       <yy:company
 >           id="example.org"
 >           actor="none"><name>Example Org</name></yy:company>
 >     </header>
 >     <body>...</>
 >   </envelope>
 >
 > In this other example, should the "next" SOAP node fault if it
 > does not understand "yy:company"?
 >   <envelope>
 >     <header>
 >       <xx:user
 >           href="#example.org"
 >           actor="next"><name>fred</name></xx:user>
 >       <yy:company
 >           mU="true"
 >           id="example.org"
 >           actor="none"><name>Example Org</name></yy:company>
 >     </header>
 >     <body>...</>
 >   </envelope>
 >
 > ... probably... after all, the second block is implicitely
 > targetted at the next SOAP node, and is not understood by that
 > node. But is this not currently disallowed by the processing
 > model (section 2.3 targetting + section 2.5 processing model,
 > although a reading of section 2.5 alone my lead to a different
 > conclusion)?
 >
 > Jean-Jacques.
 >
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2001 11:29:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:05 GMT