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

RE: XML Protocol WG requests comments by XML Core WG on position on XML Base

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:49:20 -0700
Message-ID: <330564469BFEC046B84E591EB3D4D59C035877C7@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>, "David Orchard" <orchard@pacificspirit.com>
Cc: <w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I am against the proposal to outlaw xml:base attributes on the SOAP
envelope.

1) To my knowledge, the SOAP envelope does not allow relative URIs, so
xml:base will not affect the interpretation of the envelope.  I note
that XML Base does not affect namespace URIs or QNames in the infoset.
Thus xml:base attributes will have any effect on interoperability.

2) The SOAP envelope allows qualified attributes as extensions.  It does
not preclude xml:space, xml:lang.  Since xml:base has no effect within
the envelope itself, it is difficult to see why SOAP implementations
should have the extra and unnecessary burden of rejecting a SOAP message
that has one of these attributes.

3) Can XML Schema even be used to force the exclusion of a single
qualified attribute without also outlawing the other attributes in that
namespace?

4) Presumably SOAP messages will be exposed as an infoset at some point.
Generic infoset tools will interpret and present XML Base.  Preventing
full support for XML Base may make it difficult to use generic infoset
tools on SOAP messages.

5) SOAP does not constrain the interpretation of envelope content, and
can defer the question of XML Base support within content to the
application defining the semantics of such content.  Even then, I would
hope that all such applications will recognize XML Base and be built on
the infoset.

I expect that further investigation into the implications of XML Base
will demonstrate that XML Base has no effect on SOAP.  If the SOAP
envelope does turn out to have a need for relative URIs, I would like
some evidence that XML Base is not a useful tool in determining their
meaning.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com [mailto:Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com]
> Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 2:10 PM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org; xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: XML Protocol WG requests comments by XML Core WG on
position
> on XML Base
> 
> Dear XML Core team:
> 
> (This clarification to Dave's note has no official standing as far as
the
> protocols WG goes, but I'll offer it for what it's worth...)
> 
> >> In summary, it proposes that SOAP 1.2 should
> >> disallow the use of xml:base attributes on
> >> SOAP elements
> 
> As most of you are aware, SOAP is a vocabulary for creating envelopes,
> which can be used for structuring XML-based messages.  The proposal is
NOT
> to disallow xml:base within the content of messages, but only on the
few
> elements such as "envelope", "body" and "header" that are defined by
SOAP
> itself.  We had strong feedback from some members of the workgroup
that
> forcing all SOAP processors to honor xml:base in these situations
would be
> a significant barrier to deployment, at least in the short term.
According
> to the proposal, applications are free to allow xml:base within the
> content of a header or body, as long as they are prepared to honor it.
The
> proposal goals on to say that bindings of SOAP to particular
transports
> (such as HTTP), as well as features built on SOAP (e.g.
SOAP+Attachements,
> which uses multipart MIME)   can establish a base URI for messges
passed
> over that transport or with that feature;  in such situations,
relative
> URI's can be resolved without use of xml:base, if desired.
> 
> Also:  the proposal was an attempt to capture the sense of the
protocol
> workgroup's will.  I am moderately comfortable with it, but it is not
> really "my" proposal.  I think many of us feel that xml:base should be
> allowed on SOAP elements eventually, and the question is when.  There
is
> strong sentiment among at least some wg members that now is too early.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice:
1-617-693-4036
> Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Orchard <orchard@pacificspirit.com>
> Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
> 09/07/01 07:59 PM
> 
> 
>         To:     XML Core WG <w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
>         cc:     "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, (bcc:
Noah
> Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus)
>         Subject:        XML Protocol WG requests comments by XML Core
WG
> on position on XML Base
> 
> Dear XML Core team,
> 
> The XML Protocol group would like to ask the XML Core working group
for
> feedback on a position it is contemplating wrt XML Base.  The proposal
by
> Noah Mendelsohn at [1].  In summary, it proposes that SOAP 1.2 should
> disallow the use of xml:base attributes on SOAP elements, and leave
> undefined the behaviour of relative URIs.
> 
> I'd like to have this on Wednesday's agenda if possible.  I think our
> options are roughly
> 1) The text and premise are fine
> 2) The text and premise aren't fine, and here's the reasoning why.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave Orchard
> 
> [1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Aug/0268.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2001 12:51:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:03 GMT