W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Closing XML Protocol Last Call issue 395

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:26:04 -0800
Message-ID: <68B95AA1648D1840AB0083CC63E57AD6097C68DB@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

>My question is, does it provide a unique encoding (modulo, 
>say, insignificant whitespace) or does it allow wiggle room 
>for you to introduce a <!DOCTYPE > while serializing.

Unless I am missing something, I don't think there is any wiggle room
because we state that the serialization is an XML/1.0 representation of
the SOAP message infoset, no more, no less. IMO, this means that there
is no mechanism for adding things *not* in the SOAP message infoset
including internal subsets because they would require a document type
declaration information item even if parts thereof don't show up in the

>  As 
>mentioned in my note to Gudge a minute ago, I think there are 
>some DTD constructions that are not visible in the infoset 
>(parsed entity declarations, attribute declarations w/ 
>defaults).  I don't see 3203 as prohibiting their introduction 
>into the serialization, and that's my problem.  If my concern 
>is justified, I think we close the hole by saying:  "Use the 
>application/soap+xml media type, being sure not to include a 
><!DOCTYPE>."  Or, if we want to disallow it in the media type 
>(which would take application/soap+xml further from 
>application/xml, but would otherwise be OK with me), that 
>would be OK too.

I am still not convinced that it is the Right Thing because the obvious
question would be: 'well, where would "<!DOCTYPE>" come from when
serializing a SOAP message using the mechanism described by the
"application/soap+xml" media type?'

Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 19:26:32 UTC

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