Re: [Fwd: RE: [soapbuilders] Question about root (was Re: PEAR SOAP)]

 Pete, 
 have soapbuilders discussed the current state as in SOAP 1.2 as
in the current versions? For currently, we don't have the 
attribute anymore. It isn't necessary since we don't mandate (nor 
deal with) out-of-line serialization (the SOAP/1.1 "independent 
elements on top-level of serialization").
 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
                   http://www.systinet.com/



On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Pete Hendry wrote:

 > cross posted from soapbuilders as seems relevant here
 > 
 > -------- Original Message --------
 > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Question about root (was Re: PEAR SOAP)
 > Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:13:03 -0500
 > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@PHALANXSYS.COM>
 > Reply-To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
 > Organization: Phalanx Systems, LLC
 > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > +1
 > 
 >  
 > 
 >  >The current state of affairs is pretty messy.
 > 
 >  
 > 
 > Messy!?!  It's a food fight!
 > 
 >  
 > 
 > -Matt
 > 
 >  
 > 
 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: Pete Hendry [mailto:peter.hendry@capeclear.com]
 > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 6:36 AM
 > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
 > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Question about root (was Re: PEAR SOAP)
 > 
 >  
 > 
 > On second thoughts, I think enc:root should either
 > 
 >  1. if enc:root is present on any subelement of Body then it MUST be 
 > present on all subelements of Body
 >  2. if enc:root is not present then the first subelement of Body is the 
 > serialization root
 > 
 > I have just been playing with the implementation of this and for 
 > streaming parsing it makes sense to be able to identify whether a 
 > subelement is or is not the root when seen. If root is not required on 
 > subelements before the serialization root then these elements cannot be 
 > added until the root is found. This adds unecessary complexity. Another 
 > option is for a default value of "0" and the root must be explicitely 
 > marked. This pretty much achieves the same as 1. and 2. above but 
 > requires the root attribute on only the serialization root. The current 
 > state of affairs is pretty messy.
 > 
 > Pete
 > 
 > Pete Hendry wrote:
 > 
 > >[SOAP1.1/2] "The SOAP root attribute MAY appear on any subelement within the
 > >
 > >SOAP Header and SOAP Body elements. The attribute does not have a default
 > >
 > >value."
 > >
 > >This is not sufficient. There are additional constraints that are not in the
 > >
 > >spec. These additional constraints are:
 > >
 > >1. the root attribute can only appear in elements that are immediate
 > >
 > >  subelements of the Header and Body
 > >
 > >2. at most one root attribute can have a value of "1"
 > >
 > >3. the root attributes that occur in elements after the serialization
 > >
 > >  root MAY be absent but if present MUST have value "0"
 > >
 > >4. the root attributes that occur in elements before the serialization
 > >
 > >  root MUST be present and MUST have value "0"
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >(I hope this is complete)
 > >
 > How about
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > [SOAP1.1/2] "The SOAP root attribute MAY appear on any immediate subelement within the
 > 
 > SOAP Header and SOAP Body elements. The attribute does not have a default
 > 
 > value."
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > and
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >     1. there may be a maximum of one occurance with logical value "true"
 > 
 >     2. if there is no occurance with logical value "true" then the first 
 > 
 > subelement without a root attribute is the root
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > or make the root ="true" manadatory to identify the root.. This would 
 > 
 > simplify things greatly. I frequently find that the use of MAY serves 
 > 
 > only to allow ambiguity and confusion in a specification when a MUST 
 > 
 > would clear things up. In this case a MUST would make the job of a SOAP 
 > 
 > node reading the message much easier.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Pete
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
 > 
 > HOW to SEE & RECORD EVERYTHING!
 > 
 > TINY Camera for Under $80 BUCKS! PRICE BREAKTHROUGH --> CLICK!http://us.click.yahoo.com/w7toOC/.o6DAA/yigFAA/W6uqlB/TM
 > 
 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > -----------------------------------------------------------------
 > 
 > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss implementation and interoperability issues.  Please stay on-topic.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 > 
 > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >  
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > -----------------------------------------------------------------
 > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss 
 > implementation and interoperability issues.  Please stay on-topic.
 > 
 > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service 
 > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
 > 
 > 
 > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
 > ADVERTISEMENT
 > [Click Here!] 
 > <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.1994012.3473453.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705701014:HM/A=1036972/R=0/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3466> 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > -----------------------------------------------------------------
 > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss 
 > implementation and interoperability issues.  Please stay on-topic.
 > 
 > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service 
 > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
 >

Received on Friday, 19 April 2002 07:40:22 UTC