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

Proposal for issue 277 - part 1

From: Herve Ruellan <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 17:03:51 +0200
Message-ID: <3DAADCD7.9000401@crf.canon.fr>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org

Hello all,

This is the first part of a proposal for resolving issue 277 [1] (half 
dealing with action attributed to Jean-Jacques)
This first part is about the use of URIs and QNames in the spec. The 
commentator propose that we use mostly URIs, keeping QNames only when 
needed. Since the time of the comment, the spec has evolved and in 
several places, the use of QNames have been replaced by the use of URIs.

Here is a list of the places where we still use QNames in both part 1 
[2] and part 2 [3] of the spec:

1) Part 1, SOAP Value Element (with Subcode parent)
SOAP Value EII is of type xs:QName

2) Part 1, 5.4.7 VersionMismatchFaults
The Envelope EII of the Upgrade EII has an AII called 'qname' of type 
xs:QName. This attribute contains the XML qualified name of an Envelope 
supported by a SOAP node.

3) Part 1, 5.4.8 mustUnderstand Faults
The NotUnderstood header block EII has an AII called 'qname' of type 
xs:QName. This attribute contains the XML qualified name of a SOAP 
header block not understood.

4) Part 2, 2.2 Graph Nodes
A graph node can have a type name of type xs:QName. This property define 
the type of the graph node.

5) Part 2, 3.1.4 Computing the Type Name property
The xsi:type AII is of type xs:QName. This attribute is from XML schema 
and defines the type of the type of the value.

6) Part 2, itemType Attribute Information Item
The itemType AII is of type xs:QName. This attribute defines the type of 
the elements of an array.

7) Part 2, 5.1.1 Properties
Properties are named with QNames.

(i) Keep the use of QNames in 2), 3), 4), 5), and 6)
We really want QNames in those places.

(ii) Keep QNames for fault code values.
More concise for use in SOAP messages.

(ii') Use URIs for fault code values.

(iii) in 7) defines properties with an URI instead of a QName.
URIs are better suited for giving names to things.
This allows reducing the number of namespaces defined in our spec (see 
second part of the issue).
Conversion from QName to URIs are not complicated, for example:
   context:Role ->

Best regards,


[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x277
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.xml
[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part2.xml
Received on Monday, 14 October 2002 11:03:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:21 UTC