W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2002

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-baker-soap-media-reg-00.txt (fwd)

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 10:56:58 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200201171557.KAA14700@markbaker.ca>
To: chris.ferris@sun.com (Christopher Ferris)
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Mark,
> Thanks for doing this! Some comments.

My pleasure.  Media types are a hobby of mine. 8-)

> 1) "envelope" needs to be capitalized.

Good catch.  Done.

> 2) It isn't clear that we should not adopt the fragment identifier
> meaning associated with application/xml. I don't think that
> we want to preclude use of fragment identifiers.
>     7. Fragment identifiers
>     No meaning is associated with fragment identifiers for content
>     described by the "application/soap+xml" media type.

Yah, my thinking was that fragment ids would never be used, but given
our use of hrefs, and that RFC 3023 suggests the default should be to
delegate to it for fragment syntax, it seems the default choice should
have been to change it.  Henrik said the same thing offline too.

> 3) Base URI is not addressed and should be IMO (it is in RFC3023).
>  From section 6 of [SOAP12P1]:
> 	SOAP does not define a base URI but relies on the mechanisms
> 	defined in XML Base[11] and RFC 2396[6]  for establishing a
> 	base URI against which relative URIs can be made absolute.
> Suggest that a section entitled "Base URI" be added to the ID
> and suitable text (possibly directly from the spec, or maybe
> just referencing where in the spec this is defined) be added.

Ah, yes, silly me.  I also missed referring to 3023 for security
considerations too.  I'll fix both.

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2002 10:55:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:45 UTC