- From: Dick Brooks <dick@8760.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 08:51:19 -0500
- To: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>, "XML Protocol Comments" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>The value of SOAPAction *must* be the namespace URI and local name of the >first element child of soap:Body separated by a #. If the value of >SOAPAction does not contain that value the server *must* generate a fault. There are cases in ebXML where the body contains no child elements. I presume that other SOAP message will also contain empty Body elements. In these cases would the SOAPAction contain "". Thanks, Dick Brooks (ebXML liaison) http://www.8760.com/ -----Original Message----- From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Martin Gudgin Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 4:07 AM To: XML Protocol Comments Subject: SOAPAction Proposal I've been reading the mails on SOAPAction, there seems to be some sentiment for the idea that the value of SOAPAction should reflect some information in the body of the message. Here is a proposal for discussion; The value of SOAPAction *must* be the namespace URI and local name of the first element child of soap:Body separated by a #. If the value of SOAPAction does not contain that value the server *must* generate a fault. e.g. POST someuri HTTP/1.1 Content-Type: text/xml Content-Length: nnnn SOAPAction: myuri#myelement <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap='uri for soap' > <soap:Body> <m:myelement xmlns:m='myuri' /> </soap:Body> </soap:Envelope> Note that currently SOAPAction can be anything, it doesn't need to reflect any piece of information in the body of the message. This proposal is similar ( if not identical... ) to the SOAPMethodName in SOAP 1.0[1] Flames, comments etc. to the usual address, Martin Gudgin DevelopMentor [1] http://www.soaprpc.com/mirror/ietf/draft-box-http-soap-01.txt.html
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2001 09:42:07 UTC