Proposed resolution to SOAP 1.2 Rec Issue #13

Proposed resolution to SOAP 1.2 Rec Issue #13
(http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-rec-issues.html#x13), for
consideration by the XMLP WG.

====================================
1. With regard Example 5 in SOAP 1.2 part 1, section 5.4.7.4, the submitter
proposes to change the namespace declaration from:
    "xmlns:ns2="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
to:
    "xmlns:ns2="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope"

In response, it is proposed to *not* make this change because the stated
URI is correct (see http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/).

====================================
2. In paragraph 8, section 2.1, SOAP 1.2 part 0, the submitter proposes to
change the following text:
"The choice of what data is placed in a header block and what goes in the
SOAP body are decisions taken at the time of application design."
to:
"The choices of what data is placed in a header block and what goes in the
SOAP body are decisions made at the time of application design."

In response, it is proposed to accept the submitters suggestion. The nature
of the change is an editorial correction that does not affect conformance.

====================================
3. In 2.2.1, SOAP1.2 part 0, the submitter proposes to change the following
text:
"The message exchange in Examples 1 and 2 are cases where XML-based content
conforming to some application-defined schema are exchanged via SOAP
messages."
to:
"The message exchanges in Examples 1 and 2 are cases where XML-based
contents conforming to some application-defined schema are exchanged via
SOAP messages."

In response, it is proposed to accept the submitter's suggestion. The
nature of the change is an editorial correction that does not affect
conformance.

====================================
4. The submitter proposes that all examples use either double quotes or
single quotes around attribute values, but not both. For example, some
examples use double quotes as in "<?xml version="1.0">" while other
examples use single quotes as in "<?xml version='1.0'>".

In response it is proposed to make *no* changes because (a) both forms are
legitimate, and (b) the time and effort required from both editors and
readers is burdensome.

====================================


............................................
David C. Fallside, IBM
Data Management Standards
Tel 530.477.7169 (TL 544.9665)
fallside@us.ibm.com

Received on Thursday, 20 November 2003 02:38:03 UTC