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

Who sees xbinc:Include? (First formal issue against PASWA)

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: 14 May 2003 21:58:57 +0200
To: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1052942337.1917.43.camel@localhost>

Hi all,

there are two questions we identified on the PASWA proposal:

1) does the application see xbinc:Include? 
2) does the SOAP processing model see xbinc:Include?

Everyone seems to agree that the application should not see
xbinc:Include.

The second question can be re-framed as whether we want smart protocol
bindings or whether bindings can be ignorant of xbinc:Include.

The PASWA proposal is designed to be able to work with bindings ignorant
of it, using the DoInclude header. On the other hand there is much
appeal in creating smart protocol bindings that would hide xbinc:Include
processing completely.

So the issue is: do we allow protocol bindings to optimize transmission
of SOAP Envelope infoset using the xbinc:Include technique? Even
further, do we require that bindings take care of xbinc:Include and that
the SOAP Processing model never sees an infoset with xbinc:Include
element information items?

My proposal follows:

We should allow xbinc:Include element to reach the SOAP Processing model
and specify (if the proposal isn't clear enough already) how DoInclude
header works and how the processing model doesn't change (e.g. it
doesn't have to be re-run).

We should also explicitly say that protocol bindings may be built which
use xbinc:Include themselves, in which case the SOAP processor doesn't
ever see xbinc:Include elements (or the DoInclude header).

Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect
                   Systinet Corporation
                   http://www.systinet.com/
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 15:59:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:14 GMT