W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Closure of Issue 36. (was [xml-dist-app] <none> )

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 10:37:12 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F192B1A@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'John Ibbotson'" <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>
Cc: xmlp-comments@w3.org
John, 

Apologies for not being on the call last night and participating in the
closure of Issue 36.

Given the text in the referenced email:

<quote>
"An implementation may be said to be SOAP 1.2 conformant if and only if
it satisfies the conformance requirements specified in SOAP 1.2
specification. The W3C does not at this time provide for any
comprehensive means of testing for such conformance."
</quote>

...which I take to be the basis of closing the issue, I can find *no* stated
'conformance requirements' in the editors copies of SOAP 1.2 spec. They are
not collected together and there is not statement about MUST's, MAYs,
SHOULDs etc that relates their use to notions of conformance. A search of
RFC 2119 for the words 'conform' and 'conformance' yields no occurences.

At present inclined to think that the resolution of Issue 36 somewhat duck
the requirement raised by R301a [1].

I would prefer that we give guidance in the spec. on how to recognise a
conformance requirement - Is it just the MUSTs? Is the the MUST and SHOULDs?
Have we used the imperatives in a disciplined and consistent enough way
throughout that they can be used to recognise all 'conformance
requirements'?

Regards

Stuart

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlp-reqs/z301a
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Ibbotson [mailto:john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com]
> Sent: 24 April 2002 21:40
> To: xmlp-comments@w3.org; xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: [xml-dist-app] <none>
> 
> 
> Issue 36 states that:
>                                                               
>                              --------------|
>                                                               
>                             |Since SOAP1.1 |
>                                                               
>                             |defines only a|
>                                                               
>                             |"modular      |
>                                                               
>                             |packaging     |
>                                                               
>                             |model" and    |
>                                                               
>                             |"encoding     |
>                                                               
>                             |mechanisms",  |
>                                                               
>                             |conformance   |
>                                                               
>                             |with SOAP1.1  |
>                                                               
>                             |can be viewed |
>                                                               
>                             |as            |
>                                                               
>                             |"validation"  |
>                                                               
>                             |conformance   |
>                                                               
>                             |(as in DTD or |
>                                                               
>                             |Schema        |
>                                                               
>                             |validation).  |
>                                                               
>                             |"XML Protocol |
>                                                               
>                             |requirements" |
>                                                               
>                             |is suggesting |
>                                                               
>                             |a more        |
>                                                               
>                             |rigorous      |
>                                                               
>                             |conformance   |
>                                                               
>                             |test which    |
>                                                               
>                             |includes      |
>                                                               
>                             |semantics     |
>                                                               
>                             |defined in    |
>                                                               
>                             |in-scope usage|
>                                                               
>                             |scenarios,    |
>                                                               
>                             |i.e. certain  |
>                                                               
>                             |types of      |
>                                                               
>                             |behavior.     |
>                                                               
>                              --------------|
> 
> The working group has decided to close this issue by adopting 
> the proposal
> to be found in
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Apr/0254.html
> 
> John
> 
> Emerging ebusiness Industry Architecture ,
> XML Technology and Messaging,
> IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park,
> Winchester, SO21 2JN
> 
> Tel: (work) +44 (0)1962 815188        (home) +44 (0)1722 781271
> Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898
> Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM
> email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 05:38:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:27 GMT