- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:51:11 -0700
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I would tend to disagree with this view of senders. As part of the SOAP processing model we make a fairly clear distinction between which parts of the SOAP envelope that are significant to a SOAP processor and which parts are not. In particular, I think we make it clear that there is a difference between data carried within header blocks and within the body as compared to data carried outside these places. IMO, this applies to all senders regardless of their role as intermediary or as initial sender. Given this, I think we should look at the problem in a slightly different manner by ensuring that we have a clear rule for separation of concerns regarding which data we care about and which we don't with respect to SOAP processing. In particular, I think we * want to be strict about what can be present outside header blocks and the body * have little to say about data inside header blocks and the body. I think this distinction is described already in the SOAP processing model and clarified as part of the resolution of issue 176 [1]. Here we * For comment IIs and PIIIs outside header blocks and the body we don't guarantee that they will be forwarded by intermediaries. From [2]: "A SOAP sender MUST NOT include any other child information items including element, processing instruction, unexpanded entity reference, character, and comment information items. A SOAP receiver MUST ignore such information items and a SOAP intermediary MAY discard them if relaying a SOAP message." * include the notion that PIIIs and comment IIs are allowed within header blocks and the body. From [3]: "The changes in 4 and 4.2 need to be worded carefully to make sure they're not taken to preclude character info, comments (and I suppose PI's) within header and body blocks." I see this as an editorial change clarifying section 5. Thank you, Henrik [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x176 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0183.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0193.html
Received on Sunday, 25 August 2002 13:51:43 UTC