- From: Noah Mendelsohn <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:12:50 -0500
- To: andrewl@microsoft.com
- Cc: "jacek" <jacek@systinet.com>, "xml-dist-app" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Andrew Layman asks: >> Can we make such normative statements >> universally about URI reference processing >> or should processing depend on the >> semantics of the message? I think the latter. Roughly, I've proposed that the core SOAP architecture anticipate SOAP + Attachements, DIME, etc. by including a statement that transport binding specifications SHOULD indicate which URLs (generally which schemes, but not necesarily) are used to reference data that is carried with a message, as distinct from all the other data on the Web. We use URI's for both, but I think it's useful to have a strong notion of "this data is a reference within the message, though not necessarily within the SOAP envelope." Note that these rules would apply to URI's anywhere in the message, not just where SOAP can find them. If the application finds a URI pointing to an attachement, we should specify the general characteristics of a dereference of that URI, I think. That's all I meant. Once you've got that, you can start to ask how you'd want the encodings to behave in the face of one or the other reference. Perhaps the behavior would be the same for attachments and other web references, perhaps not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 10 December 2001 16:19:58 UTC