W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > February 2003

RE: AFTF requirements, pre-2003/01/31 telcon

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 05:40:52 -0800
Message-ID: <92456F6B84D1324C943905BEEAE0278E02D30C3D@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Christopher B Ferris" <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "John J. Barton" <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>, <jones@research.att.com>, "Noah Mendelsohn" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Rich Salz" <rsalz@datapower.com>, "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <xml-dist-app-request@w3.org>
If you want it to be a document then it needs to be something whose MIME
type allows an XML document; text/xml, application/wsdl+xml,
application/soap+xml etc. 
 
At the level of the Infoset of the SOAP envelope that ancillary document
would appear as character information items.
 
As a piece of data in it's own right, the ancillary document is also an
Infoset.
 
Gudge

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] 
	Sent: 05 February 2003 13:33
	To: Martin Gudgin
	Cc: John J. Barton; jones@research.att.com; Noah Mendelsohn;
Rich Salz; Sanjiva Weerawarana; xml-dist-app@w3.org;
xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
	Subject: RE: AFTF requirements, pre-2003/01/31 telcon
	
	

	Gudge wrote on 02/05/2003 08:00:02 AM:
	
	> 
	> 
	> 
	> > -----Original Message-----
	> > From: John J. Barton [mailto:John_Barton@hpl.hp.com] 
	> > Sent: 04 February 2003 17:39
	> > To: Martin Gudgin; noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
	> > Cc: jones@research.att.com; Rich Salz; Sanjiva Weerawarana; 
	> > xml-dist-app@w3.org
	> > Subject: RE: AFTF requirements, pre-2003/01/31 telcon
	> > 
	> > 
	> > Thanks, I think that these comments make your requirement 
	> > clearer.  It seems to me that what you want is for all the 
	> > data in a package to be "reachable" from the SOAP message by

	> > XML defined means.  I think this is a reasonable requirement

	> > but not one that can be formulated with the W3C infoset
definition.
	> 
	> Oh, I think that qualified attributes would work just fine (
XInclude
	> uses qualified elements after all ).
	> 
	> > 
	> > We have an object--the SOAP XML--with some pointers inside. 
	> > Some of the pointers will resolve to entities in the
package; 
	> > some will not.  As far as I can tell the infoset, being 
	> > designed without consideration of our case, treats all 
	> > pointers the same and it considers all referenced entities
to 
	> > be outside of the infoset.  
	> 
	> The Infoset doesn't say anything about references. It knows
nothing
	> about URIs. Therefore it knows nothing about 'referenced
entities', not
	> even the fact that they exist.
	> 
	> > This is the only sensible answer 
	> > for normal hypertext documents. What you seem to want is a 
	> > "package-set" that has the properties of an infoset extended

	> > to the pointers that resolve to within the package of data 
	> > sent with the SOAP.
	> 
	> Yes, I want some or all of the 'referenced entities' to
actually appear
	> at the Infoset level. The infoset still doesn't know they were
	> 'referenced entities'. As far as the infoset is concerned the
data is
	> just inline. 
	
	Back to the question I raised previously; how does an infoset
"in line" 
	a document II within another document II??? I don't think that
loosing its 
	"documentness" is necessarily such a good thing. Sometimes, you
want it 
	to be a document, not just a collection of EIIs. 
	
	I'm still quite skeptical of this. 
	
	<snip/> 
	
	Cheers, 
	
	Christopher Ferris
	Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
	email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
	phone: +1 508 234 3624
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 08:41:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:13 GMT