RE: Proposed Clarification for Issues 4 and 23

In a previous mail [1], I mentioned that I strongly suggest requiring
namespace qualification on SOAP defined parts because it otherwise
leaves in a lot of ambiguity that also affects our processing model and
versioning model. That is, using the wording:

	A SOAP processor MUST namespace-qualify all elements
	and attributes defined by SOAP that are explicitly
	not defined as unqualified in all messages that it
	generates. A SOAP processor MUST be able to process
	namespace qualification in messages that it receives.
	It SHOULD discard messages that are not SOAP messages
	by these rules (see section 4.4).

However, I am somewhat concerned about the other part of the proposal
that forbids use of PIs:

	A XMLP/SOAP message MUST NOT contain Processing
	Instructions. [7]

The reason is that we might run into problems if people would want to
associate parts of a message with a stylesheet, for example, which uses
the xml-stylesheet PI [2]. I suggest that we instead say something like
this:

	SOAP does not use PIs, however, PIs are permitted
	within a SOAP message as long as they do not affect
	the SOAP processing model

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Jun/0166.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-stylesheet/

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Marc Hadley [mailto:marc.hadley@sun.com] 
>Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 04:32
>To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
>Subject: Proposed Clarification for Issues 4 and 23
>
>
>On last nights conference call I volunteered to propose a 
>clarification for issues 4 and 23 (now closed as a duplicate 
>of 4). The issues relate to the correct use of namespaces and 
>the inclusion of PIs and DTDs in XMLP/SOAP messages, 
>specifically how a XMLP/SOAP processor should react to their presence.
>
>The current text (from Section 3) is as follows:
>
>"A XMLP/SOAP application SHOULD include the proper XMLP/SOAP 
>namespace on all elements and attributes defined by XMLP/SOAP 
>in messages that it generates. A XMLP/SOAP application MUST be 
>able to process XMLP/SOAP namespaces in messages that it 
>receives. It MUST discard messages that have incorrect 
>namespaces (see section 4.4) and it MAY process XMLP/SOAP 
>messages without XMLP/SOAP namespaces as though they had the 
>correct XMLP/SOAP namespaces."
>
><snip/>
>
>"A XMLP/SOAP message MUST NOT contain a Document Type 
>Declaration. A XMLP/SOAP message MUST NOT contain Processing 
>Instructions. [7]"
>
>The general consensus on the call was that an XMLP/SOAP 
>processor should generate a fault if the correct namespaces 
>are not used or if a PI or Document Type Declaration is 
>encountered. I propose to replace the existing text above with 
>the following revised text:
>
>"A XMLP/SOAP processor SHOULD include the proper XMLP/SOAP 
>namespace on all elements and attributes defined by XMLP/SOAP 
>in messages that it generates. A XMLP/SOAP processor MUST be 
>able to process XMLP/SOAP namespaces in messages that it 
>receives and it MAY process XMLP/SOAP messages without 
>XMLP/SOAP namespaces as though they had the correct XMLP/SOAP 
>namespaces. It MUST generate a fault (see section 4.4) on 
>receipt of messages that have incorrect namespaces."
>
><snip/>
>
>"A XMLP/SOAP message MUST NOT contain a Document Type 
>Declaration. A XMLP/SOAP message MUST NOT contain Processing 
>Instructions [7]. A XMLP/SOAP processor MUST generate a fault 
>(see section 4.4) on receipt of messages that contain a 
>Document Type Declaration or Processing Instruction."
>
>Comments ?
>
>Marc.
>
>--
>Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
>Tel: +44 1252 423740
>Int: x23740
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2001 15:51:39 UTC