Re: Comments from a Read-Through of Part 1

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
To: "Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>; "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Comments from a Read-Through of Part 1


> Now to the moderate ones...
>
<SNIP/>
>
> > * Section 5.3: there are two bullet lists in this section.  The last
entry
> > in the first list, and first entry in the second list convey the same
> > information.  Both of them indicate that element information item
children
> > of the body must be namespace qualified.  Duplication should be
eliminated.
>
> Ibid. for 5.2. Gudge?

I don't agree that this is duplication. The earlier clause is describing the
[children] property of the parent. The later clause is describing the
[namespace name] property of the children.


<SNIP/>

> > *Section 5.4.5:
> > Original:
> > "All child element information items of the detail element information
item
> > are called detail entries.
> > Each such element information item:
> > MAY be namespace qualified.
> > MAY have an encodingStyleattribute information item."
> > Question:  Can they have element children?  What about additional
> > attributes?
>
> My guess is that not listing them disallows them. Gudge?

You guessed wrong :-). The schema is very clear that any element of any type
( and therefore with any content/attribute combination ) are allowed as
children of detail. I've updated the prose to make this explicit;

5.4.5.1 SOAP detail entry

Each detail entry:

    MAY be namespace qualified.
    MAY have any number of element information item children
    MAY have any number of character information item children
    MAY have an encodingStyle attribute information item.
    MAY have any number of other attribute information items from any
namespace

Gudge

Received on Friday, 5 April 2002 08:09:39 UTC