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

RE: Issue 189: closed

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 20:13:24 -0800
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D06F98AC1@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, "Yves Lafon" <ylafon@w3.org>

Hmm, my reading is that we allow one child EII which is the envelope but
that other properties like base URI, encoding and version are properties
and not child EIIs and hence also allowed. In section "Use of URIs in
SOAP" we do allow a base URI to be propagated from the underlying
protocol - I had thought that this would be through the base URI
property. If this is not the case then that should be corrected too.

>"A SOAP message is specified as an XML Infoset that consists 
>of a document 
>information item with exactly one child, which MUST be the 
>SOAP Envelope 
>element information item (see 5 SOAP Message Construct)."
>
>Infoset [2] makes clear that [version] is a child of the doc 
>info item. 
>So, it looks to me like we DON'T have version information.  If that's 
>intentional, fine.  If not, we need to consider revisions.  I 
>also think 
>the HTTP binding needs to be clear on how the serialization 
>looks. Thanks!

Henrik 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part1.html#soapenv
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#infoitem.document
[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/1/10/11/soap12-part1.html#useofuris
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2002 23:13:44 GMT

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