Re: Two issues to be opened relating to my rewrite for Issue 101 (and one more already resolved)

Thanks.  Actually, the latest WD sometimes refers to multiple forms ("If 
MU is "true" or "1"").  I think we can take that down to one form ("if MU 
is "true"")  and then use the proposal as I suggest below.  Thanks.

Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

"Jean-Jacques Moreau" <>
12/20/2001 07:11 AM

        To:     Noah Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus@Lotus
        Subject:        Re: Two issues to be opened relating to my rewrite for Issue 101 (and  one 
more  already resolved)

+1 for the resolution on your first issue (excerpt appended below) wrote:

> * For envelope attributes, we should use the proper XML Schemas simple 
> terminology, carefully indicate when we are referring to lexical vs. 
> space, and if a subtype is used (e.g. a boolean that only accepts 
> form "1"), make clear that we are doing so.
> We do not currently have an issue open on this.  I propose that we open
> such an issue and resolve it along the following lines:  we should
> indicate, probably in chapter 4, that "attributes in the SOAP envelope
> described by "Part 1: Framework" are are of types from XML Schema:
> Datatypes (e.g. mustUnderstand is a boolean).  Unless otherwise stated, 
> lexical forms are supported for each such attribute, and lexical forms
> representing the same value in the XML Schema value space are considered
> equivalent for purposes of SOAP processing.  Thus, the boolean lexical
> forms "1" and "true" [ref to boolean datatype in the schema spec] are
> interchangeable.  For brevity, text in this specification refers only to
> one lexical form for each value (e.g. "if the value of mustUnderstand is
> "true").  Unless otherwise stated, such references implicitly cover all
> forms corresponding to the same value in the value space.  However, when 
> header block is relayed by an intermediary [see section 2.6], the 
> form of any attributes within that block MUST be preserved.  "

Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 10:25:10 UTC