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

RE: LC issue 221

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:34:44 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F04A06FB8@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'iwasa'" <kiwasa@jp.fujitsu.com>, xmlp-comments@w3.org
Iwasa et al.,
I am happy that the WGs resolution makes a clearer statement about the
transmission, reception and forwarding of PIs. 
It seems clear that a SOAP message that contains PI's cannot have been
generated by a conforming SOAP 1.2 implementation. 
This may be an issue for others (eg. who wish to use SOAP to transfer XML
fragments that do contain PIs). 
My issue was that we make a clear and consistent statement - That has been
Thank you,
  -----Original Message-----
From: iwasa [mailto:kiwasa@jp.fujitsu.com]
Sent: 02 August 2002 06:34
To: xmlp-comments@w3.org
Cc: skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Subject: LC issue 221

The following LC issue #221 [1] was discussed in the F2F meeting on 7/30.
LC issue #221:
  (Section 5 SOAP Message Construct)
   3rd paragraph: We are not clear about whether intermediaries MUST,
   MAY, SHOULD NOT or MUST NOT forward PIs - only that a message SHOULD NOT 
   contain them.
The WG has agreed to close this issue #221 with the following resolution:
   SOAP sender MUST NOT send a message containing Processing Instructions 
   Information Items(PIIIs). SOAP receivers (including intermediaries) 
   receiving a message with a PIII SHOULD generate an error. Whenever
   receivers should detect PIIIs and fault. The above rule says SHOULD (as
   to MUST) only to allow for implementations in which performance
   outweigh the desirability of detecting erroneous messages."
We trust that this resolution satisfies your concern. If not, please
contact the WG asap.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues#x221
Received on Wednesday, 14 August 2002 07:37:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:59 UTC