W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > July 2001

Re: [SOAP] [soapbuilders] Publication of the first W3C Working Drafts of SOAP Version 1.2 and of the XML Protocol Abstract Model

From: David Fallside <fallside@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:54:53 -0700
To: xmlp-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF7EB59D40.8DDB3BE8-ON88256A8D.001000A5@boulder.ibm.com>

David C. Fallside, IBM
Ext Ph: 530.477.7169
Int  Ph: 544.9665

----- Forwarded by David Fallside/Santa Teresa/IBM on 07/17/2001 07:54 PM
                    Martin Gudgin                                                                                    
                    <marting@DEVELOP       To:     SOAP@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM                                          
                    .COM>                  cc:                                                                       
                    Sent by: SOAP          Subject:     Re: [SOAP] [soapbuilders] Publication of the first W3C       
                    <SOAP@DISCUSS.DE        Working              Drafts of              SOAP Version 1.2 and of the  
                    VELOP.COM>              XML Protocol Abstract Model                                              
                    07/10/2001 05:50                                                                                 
                    Please respond                                                                                   
                    to SOAP                                                                                          

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kulchenko" <paulclinger@yahoo.com>
To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>; <soap@discuss.develop.com>
Cc: "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 1:31 AM
Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Publication of the first W3C Working Drafts of
SOAP Version 1.2 and of the XML Protocol Abstract Model

> Hi, All!
> New spec draft needs new issue list, right? :))
> Here is the list of what I can see after the first reading (i'm not
> subscribed to xmlp-comments@w3.org, can someone forward message there
> if it's correct).
> 1. mustUnderstand is fixed to allow '1/0/true/false' (boolean in
> schema), but specification explicitly says only about '1' and '0'

Thanks. I've put this on the editors 'todo' list

> 2. Example 7 specifies faultcode as Name instead of QName

Yes, should be env:MustUnderstand, sorry. On the editors 'todo' list.

> 3. Spec uses xsi:null="1" where xsi:nil="true" should be used (5.1.9
> is one example). And it's only "true", not boolean "true/1".

On the editors 'todo' list.

> 4. No clarification about "top level of serialization" (did I miss
> it?)

What kind of clarification were you looking for?

> 5. 5.1.8 says: 'A SOAP array member MAY contain a "enc:offset"' and
> use enc:offset and enc:position in the same context, whereas refers
> to [ Partially Transmitted Arrays] which says about enc:offset
> on Array element itself. Schema shows enc:offset on Array element
> also.

OK, I think this is an area that needs some clean up. I think it should
like this;

1.    enc:offset appears on the array element only.
2.    enc:position appears on the array members only.

I don't think offset makes sense on array members.
I don't think position makes sense on the array itself unless that array is
in fact a member of an outer array.

Open question, is position absolute or relative to offset? I prefer the

> 6. Schema defines root attribute as boolean, whereas spec says only
> about "0/1" as values.

Thanks. on the editors 'todo' list

> 7. Appendix C says: 'The upgrade extension contains an ordered list
> of namespace identifiers of SOAP envelopes that the SOAP node
> supports in the order most to least preferred.', but doesn't give any
> examples on how to do it for more than one envelope supported and I
> can't figure it out from the text.

Thanks. Hopefully we will add an example in the next WD.

> 8. D.2 Schema changes doesn't reflect changes from ut-type to anyType
> (anySimpleType).

The ur-type didn't change. All that happened was the schema-for-schemas now
has a definition of the ur-type called 'anyType'. That said I should have
noted in the table that the element decl and complex type named 'ur-type'
had been replaced with an element decl called 'anyType'. On the editors

> Best wishes, Paul.

Thanks very much for the feedback

Martin Gudgin

You can read messages from the SOAP archive, unsubscribe from SOAP, or
subscribe to other
DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2001 03:02:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:58 UTC