Re: Issue 189 proposals:

Hi Dave.

* David Orchard <> [2004-07-19 16:43-0700]
> I've rewritten my proposals for Issue 189 into more easily parsable text that end in concrete text.  I'm proposing 4 straightforward changes to part 3, and I've dropped any proposal for solving the unknown namespace prefix problem.
> Issue part #1
> As I've shown the "Music" example at, there are some cases where the current wsdl binding makes it impossible to fully utilize HTTP with the current uri-encoding style.  In particular, the PUT operation cannot work with the www-form-uriencoded style which is a client-generated URI mechanism.  
> One scenario is a "PUT" operation.  An HTTP PUT says that the input resource replaces the resource at the URI.  These URIs are typically dynamic, either constructed at the client or the server.  In the case of a client constructed URI using the www-form-uriencoding style, we would need to have the input data that will be used in the URI.  An example of this is an ID element, which would be used to make an entry like /Music/Artist?id=5.  Also think of how to set the temperature of Frejus.  
> Proposal #1
> Add to section the following paragraph:
> A "/" after the element cited in the location attribute indicates that elements not cited in the location attribute MUST not be serialized in the request URI.

I am having problem putting this into the spec as your proposal above
is incomplete I believe: what if there are several elements cited in
the location attribute for example?

Also, I keep going back to Asir's and my question about having to
escape a / which we were told was not needed.

So, let me make sure I get it right.

If I have:


then the draft as it stands says that:
- location="{a}/{b}" serializes as "1/2?c=3&d=4"
- location="{a}/{b}/" serializes as "1/2/?c=3&d=4"

Now, your proposal is that location="{a}/{b/}" serializes as "1/2",
and that the rest be serialized as application/xml, i.e.:


Am I right?



Hugo Haas - W3C -

Received on Monday, 26 July 2004 05:46:23 UTC