- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 14:05:40 -0400
- To: "Martin Gudgin" <martin.gudgin@btconnect.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
At 5:18 PM +0100 7/23/02, Martin Gudgin wrote:
>Elliotte,
>
>Just out of curiosity do you want all the *descendants* of Detail to be
>qualified? Or is making the *children* qualified sufficient?
>
My general principle is that I want all elements defined by the SOAP
spec to be namespace qualified by the SOAP namespace URI defined in
the SOAP spec. (This assumes there's no good reason to use multiple
URIs). Custom elements defined by users that are not defined in the
SOAP spec should probably be namespace qualified as well, but with a
different custom namespace. If elements aren't namespace qualified,
they should be consistently so.
I specifically object to cases like this example in the Primer:
<e:myfaultdetails
xmlns:e="http://travelcompany.example.org/faults" >
<message>Name does not match card number</message>
<errorcode>999</errorcode>
</e:myfaultdetails>
That should be
<e:myfaultdetails
xmlns:e="http://travelcompany.example.org/faults" >
<e:message>Name does not match card number</e:message>
<e:errorcode>999</e:errorcode>
</e:myfaultdetails>
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2002 14:15:58 UTC