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

Re: why no doc type declaration and PIs in SOAP?

From: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 17:59:44 +0100
Message-ID: <3BAA2080.504@sun.com>
To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@idoox.com>
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Jacek Kopecky wrote:
>  I couldn't find it in archives (because the search engine
> returned nothing at all), so I'll ask:
>  What are the reasons for disallowing document type declaration
> and processing instructions in SOAP? Will we keep the
> restrictions in SOAP version 1.2? As it is now, SOAP grammar is a
> subset of XML.
We discussed this at the recent F2F in relation to issue 4 which raises 
the question of what a receiver should do on receipt of a message 
containing a PI or DTD. I have an pending action to re-raise this issue 
- consider it raised !

There seems to be two opinions on the subject of DTDs and PIs:

(i) Allowing them increases complexity and doesn't bring any particular 
benefit, the only compelling argument for allowing PIs was so that a 
stylesheet could be associated with a message for human viewing.

(ii) Adding them doesn't add much to the complexity, they are part of 
XML so we should allow them.

My original suggestion for resolution of issue 4 was to retain their 
current status (i.e. not allowed) and add text requiring a SOAP 
processor to generate a fault when a message containing one was received.

Others felt that if present they should be ignored but this might prove 
difficult in the case of DTDs with current parsers.

Discussion ?


Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 13:01:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:15 UTC