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

Re: Proposal for resolution to issue 190

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:23:08 -0500
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF7CB1E615.8F41DD6F-ON85256B81.006B7ABD@lotus.com>
HFN writes:

>> If this is true then we might be able to close issue 190 by referring to
183.

Looks good to me.  I'd say "close it".  Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------







"Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
03/19/2002 12:28 PM

 
        To:     <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
        cc: 
        Subject:        Proposal for resolution to issue 190



Issue 190 [0] states that:

"In his recent comments on Part1, Noah raised the following
issue : "[NRM12] We can't keep applications from requiring
validation for their own content.  How can we keep applications
from supplying defaults for their own purposes? We even do it for
our own attributes.""

And proposes the following resolution

<proposal author="Noah">
Except where this specification mandates a default value for an
attribute, SOAP messages must carry explicit values for all
attribute information items required by this recommendation.
</proposal>

I think this has been already addressed by resolution to issue 183 [2]
which caused the offending text to be rewritten [3] as follows:

"SOAP does not require any XML schema processing (assessment or
validation) in order to establish the values or correctness of element
and attribute information items defined by this specification. These
information items must, unless stated otherwise, be carried explicitly
in the transmitted SOAP message (see 3 SOAP Message Construct).

Specifications for the processing of application-defined data carried in
a SOAP message but not defined by this specification may but NEED NOT
call for additional validation of the SOAP message in conjunction with
application-level processing. In such cases, the choice of schema
language and/or validation technology is at the discretion of the
application."

If this is true then we might be able to close issue 190 by referring to
183.

Comments?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

[0] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x190
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Mar/0134.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0186.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part1.html#reltoxml
Received on Tuesday, 19 March 2002 14:38:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:09 GMT