- From: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 15:53:05 -0700
- To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Issue 18 [1] notes that the @transport attribute information item (AII) of the soap:binding element information item (EII) is shown as optional by the XML Schema but is listed as required by the prose. All examples of soap:binding include @transport. In the last-call for SOAP 1.2, Part 2 [2], the SOAP binding for HTTP states that implementations should use HTTP 1.1 but may use HTTP 1.0. To avoid ambiguity, I propose that the @transport AII be mandatory. For the SOAP 1.2 binding, we may consider defining separate values for @transport to indicate whether HTTP 1.1 or HTTP 1.0 is used. Issue 28 [2] raises the concern that @transport may be poorly named since: (a) there may be several bindings for a given transport, and (b) @transport does not allow specifying binding-specific options. Regarding (a), making @transport an AII of a binding EII indicates the correct scoping of the transport as a parameter of the binding. Since this AII indicates the transport used by a specific binding, "transport" is a reasonable name. Regarding (b), a clean design would indicate other binding parameters using other AII or children. @transport conveys a single parameter of the binding. I propose no changes in response to Issue 28. --Jeff [1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/issues/wsd-issues.html# x18 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-soap12-part2-20020626/#soapinhttp [3] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/issues/wsd-issues.html# x28
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 18:54:23 UTC