Re: Comments on SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework

Hugo, thanks for your comments.

Re. identifying MEPs by a URI, this has been raised as a LC issue [1] by Glenn
Daniels.

Re. outside references, you may be aware that the XMLP WG is thinking of
publishing an Attachment Note. I expect such a note to cover outside
references. Also, the SOAP Encoding section (Part 2) now uses idref's
(previously href's), to clearly point out references are internal to the
message. Do you think the spec should be more explicit?

Jean-Jacques.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002May/0223.html

Hugo Haas wrote:

> 3) Comment: section 3.3 reads[2]:
>
> |   In general the definition of a message exchange pattern:
> |     * Is named by a URI.
> |     * Describes the life cycle of a message exchange conforming to the
> |       pattern.
> |     * Describes the temporal/causal relationships of multiple messages
> |       exchanged in conformance with the pattern.
> |     * Describes the normal and abnormal termination of a message
> |       exchange conforming to the pattern.
>
> This suggest that not all MEPs are identified by a URI. From an
> architectural point of view, and according to AR009.3, all conceptual
> elements should be addressable directly via a URI.
>
> I think that a URI should be required for MEPs: it is easy enough to
> assign one and will ease identification.
>
> 4) Comment: Outside references.
>
> Section 2.6 reads[3]:
>
> |   SOAP nodes MAY make reference to any information in the SOAP envelope
> |   when processing a SOAP body or SOAP header block. For example, a
> |   caching function can cache the entire SOAP message, if desired.
>
> I wonder about external references. They are not explicitely
> disallowed, but not referenced either. Needless to say, I think that
> external references are useful, e.g. to reference a large image that
> one doesn't want to carry along in the message.

Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2002 04:25:04 UTC