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

Re: discarding incorrect namespaces

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:31:35 -0700
To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: XML Distributed Applications List <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20010912083130.A18345@mnot.net>


Will SOAP 1.2 implementations recognise the namespace of SOAP 1.3
envelopes? I'd think this should be a situation that generates a
Fault...


On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 05:54:30AM +0100, Williams, Stuart wrote:
> 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/
>  

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
 
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2001 11:31:43 GMT

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