RE: Is whitespace significant in SOAP Messages?

Yes, I think you have the technical analysis right. 

Regarding release of the draft:  I can't speak for the WG, but you are 
correct if you infer that the text in the editors drafts is hoped to be 
near final.  Now, even if the WG feels that way, there are a set of steps 
in the W3C process, such as "last call" and "proposed recommendation" 
before this could become a recommendation.  If everyone who reviews this 
work loves it, then there need be no significant changes on the way to 
rec.  If issues are raised, then the resolutions might have anything from 
a small effect, to a large effect, to actually derailing the whole effort 
(not likely, but concievable in principle.)

Noah Mendelsohn                              Voice: 1-617-693-4036
IBM Corporation                                Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Kevin Johnsrude <>
06/19/02 03:10 PM

        To:     "''" <>
        cc:     "''" <>
        Subject:        RE: Is whitespace significant in SOAP Messages?

> From: []
> I believe the latest editors' draft of SOAP part 1 is clearer 
> on this. 

Thank you, Noah.  Looking at the working draft at

Are the following assertions the intended interpretation of the use case:
    <m:GetLastTradePrice xmlns:m="Some-URI">
      <symbol> DIS</symbol>
         bright    orange


The whitespace is NOT significant between:
 the Envelope and Body start (end) tags and
 the Body and the "GetLastTradePrice" start (end) tags 
per Section 5:
"Element information items defined by this specification can have zero or
more character information item children whose character code is amongst 
whitespace characters as defined by [8]. Unless otherwise indicated, such
character information items are considered insignificant." 

The whitespace IS significant between:
 <m:GetLastTradePrice ...> and <symbol>
 <symbol> and "DIS"
 </symbol> and <color>
 "color" start (end) tags and "bright    orange"
 "bright" and "orange"
 </color> and </m:GetLastTradePrice>
 per 5.3.1:
"All child element information items of the SOAP Body element information
MAY have any number of character information item children. Child 
information items whose character code is amongst the whitespace 
as defined by [8] are considered significant."

> Most likely, this text will appear in a formal working draft 
> shortly. Hope this helps.

Thank you, Noah, it does. When will the next working draft be released?  I
thought that the next draft might actually be a recommendation; is that no
longer the case?

Kevin Johnsrude
Rogue Wave Software,

Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2002 16:54:51 UTC