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

RE: discarding incorrect namespaces

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 05:54:30 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F026A8707@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: XML Distributed Applications List <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Hi Mark,

I think that there may be two cases of 'incorrect' that may need to be
further distinguished.

1) Namespaces (on the root element) that are completely unrecognised.
2) Namespaces that are recognised but whose semantics are not implemented
   the receiving node.

In both cases the 'incorrect' namespace may be that of a previous SOAP
envelope version. IMO it is only in the latter case that a node should
consider generating a response (eg. a SOAP Fault). 

In the first case, the recipient node has not made positive determination
that the received message is a SOAP message (of any envelope version). In
this case the generation and subsequent transmission of a SOAP fault could
only serve to compound the failure if the recipient of the fault does not
recognise the envelope version of the response.

ie.
In the 1st case I think that the appropriate action is indeed to discard the
message received with the 'incorrect' namespace.

In the 2nd case it is reasonable to deduce that the sender is a SOAP Node
compliant with some version of SOAP and there may be appropriate action to
take other than discarding the message.


Regards

Stuart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net]
> Sent: 10 September 2001 23:49
> To: XML Distributed Applications List
> Subject: Re: discarding incorrect namespaces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't remember it either; I based my comments on the pre-split
> Working Draft. 
> 
> On the face of it, this looks better, except it still says 'It MUST
> discard messages that have incorrect namespace information' which
> conflicts with the envelope versioning Fault, IIRC.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 02:25:07PM -0700, Hugo Haas wrote:
> > Hi Mark.
> > 
> > I was rereading the spec and noticed that this had been changed.
> > 
> > * Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> [2001-08-17 14:14-0700]
> > > Finally, considering our versioning model, does it make sense to
> > > upgrade
> > > 
> > > "A SOAP application SHOULD include the proper SOAP 
> namespace on all
> > > elements and attributes defined by SOAP in messages that it
> > > generates."
> > > 
> > > to MUST, and strike
> > > 
> > > "... MAY process SOAP messages without SOAP namespaces as 
> though they had
> > > the correct SOAP namespaces."
> > > 
> > > This is in the context of all SOAP namespaces, not just 
> the envelope,
> > > but it seems prudent to clarify in some fashion.
> > 
> > Section 3 now reads[1]:
> > 
> >    A SOAP node MUST ensure that all element information items and
> >    attribute information items in messages that it generates are
> >    correctly namespace qualified.
> > 
> > Is that something we agreed on? I don't remember discussing this. I
> > like this change, but I would like to check that everybody 
> is aware of
> > and happy with it. That would resolve issue 135[2].
> > 
> >   1. 
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/08/29/soap12-part1.html#reltoxml
>   2. http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x135
> -- 
> Hugo Haas - W3C
> mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/ - tel:+1-617-452-2092
> 

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
 
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2001 00:55:51 GMT

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