- From: Bob Cunnings <cunnings@lectrosonics.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 09:18:45 -0700
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Hello, Would this be meaningful enough? I'm thinking of the case in which the body contains multi-ref elements. The first child element might be merely a multi-ref, whose identity bears no real significance as to the message intent. Don't you want something whose calculation yields a less variable result from message to message? How about using the name of the first serialization root found within the body? Based on my experience in SOAP implementation, I still think that any SOAPAction value is best left as arbitrarily defined... making it something generated from the message contents opens up a real can of worms. RC 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
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2001 11:19:46 UTC