- From: Pete Hendry <peter.hendry@capeclear.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 18:45:45 +1200
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Jacek Kopecky wrote: > In fact, why is it necessary that Body entries be qualified? For validation. It is required that the element name in the body be resolvable to a schema element definition (assuming schema as the type system of course) so that validation can proceed on the body contents. Because the body is defined as <any> either there must be an xsi:type on all the body elements (which is not currently required - and not possible for rpc) or the element name must be resolvable. Keep it qualified! > > Same for header entries. 8-) If anyone is worried their name could be > conflictful, they would namespace-qualify it. 8-) > Same again if you want validation (which the service provider decides rather than the client so you don't want the option of non-qualified header entries being given to the client). > > I'm for consistency here, and it seems the easier way to achieve it > will be to change Fault/Detail/* rules. 8-) > Again for detail entries, where their names should allow finding their element definition in the schema. They should only be unqualified if their schema definition is in the no-namespace-schema. Pete
Received on Friday, 19 July 2002 02:40:27 UTC