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

Re: Proposal for resolving 144, 161, 117: array serialization

From: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 09:59:13 -0500
Message-ID: <3C332041.2030608@zolera.com>
To: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
To recap.  I looked at sec5.1, definition #5 and said that since the 
spec defines a SOAP "array" where only the position distinguishes among 
values, the names are not significant and a conforming implementation 
could "lose" the name information. [1]

Andrew quotes 5.1 rule2C and said that the name could be important, and 
that it is not legit for the SOAP layer to toss it. [2]


The message that started the thread is [3].

I believe that 5.1def5 is defining a "SOAP 'array'", and not a 
general-purpose array, and that if the names are important, then you 
cannot use a SOAP "array" to encode your otherwise-array-like data.

Can we have a ruling from the floor?  And appropriate clarification 
language in 1.2?

Happy new year.
	/r$
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Dec/0287.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Dec/0288.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Dec/0248.html

-- 
Zolera Systems, Your Key to Online Integrity
Securing Web services: XML, SOAP, Dig-sig, Encryption
http://www.zolera.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2002 09:56:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:05 GMT