W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2001

Re: Issue #170 proposal - referencing to missing data

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:53:07 +0100 (CET)
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112061652560.3189-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 the reason why I mentioned LISP's optionally evaluated
parameters is that in LISP, such expressions that need optionally
evaluated parameters are only supported by so called special
forms (or macros), none of which are proper functions.
 Since I also think that such weak referencing can be achieved by
lazy parsing (we don't mandate that the data be deserialized
fully before doing _any_ RPC processing) or at the application
level and so I propose we don't explicitly allow weak references.
 I don't think we can say "you SHOULD generate a
UnresolvedReference fault" unless we add something like "because
your application can know better" and this doesn't feel right,
it's not spec-speak.
 We haven't specified the "process of deserialization" anyway so
I think we can leave this as to encompass lazy deserialization,
therefore not encountering the broken link in our case.
 So what I propose is to say that "processor MUST generate" the
fault, as in [1].
 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Dec/0018.html

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:

 > I am using weak reference in its generic sense:  a reference that can
 > appear to be present, but is not considered to be in error if it cannot in
 > fact be successfully used to retrieve a target.  I think that's the same
 > definition you are using.   The reason I think we have a relationship
 > between weak references and optional arguments is that in SOAP, the
 > arguments to an RPC are modeled as a struct.  If we don't have some notion
 > of weak references, then there is a decoding failure in even attempting to
 > build the struct, I.e. before we can worry about which argument is which.
 > That's the reason I used function arguments as an example of weak
 > reference.
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
 > Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
 > One Rogers Street
 > Cambridge, MA 02142
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2001 10:53:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:43 UTC