RE: LC Issue 210

In Section 5.1.1, which sentence is being changed from SHOULD NOT to MUST?
The text in the LC version is different from the text noted in Issue 209.
I do not mind adding the text raised in Issue 209 to clarify what is in the
current spec.

Lynne

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:martin.gudgin@btconnect.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:05 AM
To: Kevin Johnsrude; noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Subject: Re: LC Issue 210



How does it contradict?

'The encodingStyle attribute SHOULD NOT appear on the SOAP
 Envelope [reference to 5.1], SOAP Body [reference to 5.3] or SOAP
 Header [reference to 5.2] element information items.'

says 'not on soap:Envelope, soap:Header or soap:Body'

 'Each SOAP header block element information item:
...
 
  * MAY have an encodingStyle attribute information item in its
    [attributes] property.'

says 'may appear on CHILDREN of soap:Header'

Or are you making another point that I'm missing?

Gudge
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Johnsrude" <kevinj@roguewave.com>
To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 5:26 PM
Subject: LC Issue 210


> 
> In LC #210 [1] the statement:
> Each SOAP header block element information item:
> ...
> 
>  * MAY have an encodingStyle attribute information item in its
>    [attributes] property. 
> 
> directly contradicts the closed LC #209 [2]:
> 
> Section 5.1.1:
> > The encodingStyle attribute SHOULD NOT appear on the SOAP
> > Envelope [reference to 5.1], SOAP Body [reference to 5.3] or SOAP
> > Header [reference to 5.2] element information items.
> Not sure whether this should be a MUST because of the scoping rules for
> encodingStyle ?
> 
> Resolution: 
>     The XMLP WG has decided to close issue 209 by changing the SHOULD
>     to a MUST, in order to bring the text in agreement with the
>     schema. It considers this issue is editorial in nature.
> 
> Cheers,
> Kevin 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x210
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x209
>

Received on Thursday, 11 July 2002 13:37:27 UTC