- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:53:07 +0100 (CET)
- To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Noah, 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) http://www.systinet.com/ [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