W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > February 2004

RE: Potential new SOAP Issue

From: Don Box <dbox@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 06:04:09 -0800
Message-ID: <7C5CC590304B6E41AE2A0E97D54DDF5601EB81EE@RED-MSG-31.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

Is there an Infoset 1.1? Are there plans for such a beast?

I hope the answer is no on both fronts.

DB


> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 1:12 PM
> To: xmlp-comments@w3.org
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Potential new SOAP Issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that XML 1.1 is a recommendation, and allows characters not
allowed in
> XML 1.0, it seems to me we need a review of our entire recommendation,
as
> well as XOP and MTOM drafts, to make sure we are clear on issues such
as:
> 
>    Are the new control characters allowed by XML 1.1 allowed in XML
SOAP
>    Envelope infosets?  If so, do you indicate this in the version of
the
>    Infoset Document Information item?
>    If allowed, I don't see how the HTTP binding would send them using
the
>    usual RFC 3203-based serialization, which my quick reading shows as
XML
>    1.0.
>    We refer in the rec to XML 1.0 whitespace, but XML 1.1 allows NEL
(x85)
>    as whitespace.  Are we at least clear as to what is whitespace and
what
>    isn't for SOAP?
>    Is it legal to write a new binding or media type that sends the new
>    control chars, perhaps using XML 1.1 serialization?  This would
seem to
>    break the equivalence among bindings.
>    We should similarly make sure XOP and MTOM are clear on these
issues.
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 6 February 2004 09:05:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 22:28:13 UTC