- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 22:13:01 -0400
- To: "Herve Ruellan" <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Herve Ruellan writes: >> That's correct, we could just use the namespace URI of the envelope version. I'm not sure I've thought this through properly, but what if some future version of soap changed the local part of the envelope name: <soap:Envelope2 xmlns:soap="...uri for soap 2.0..."> Is it completely clear that SOAP 1.2 would never want to send a version mismatch for this? I can't quite decide how it would know, but you could argue that any root element of the supposed message infoset is by definition intended as some version of the envelope. If so, I think we need to send either a QName or an Expanded Name, and I suggest we stick with QName. In general, sending just the namespace name on the theory that the local name is always Envelope seems unnecessarily tricky. We use QNames to identify elements in many other faults, so I suggest doing the same here. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Herve Ruellan" <ruellan@crf.canon.fr> Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org 10/14/2002 11:03 AM To: xml-dist-app@w3.org cc: (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM) Subject: Proposal for issue 277 - part 2 Hello all, This is the second part of a proposal for resolving issue 277 [1] (half dealing with action attributed to Jean-Jacques) This second part is about the use of many Namespaces in the spec, which may be unwieldy and unnecessary. Here is a list of the namespaces used in the spec (both part 1 [2] and part 2 [3]) and a summary of their use: 1) env -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope Used for Envelope related EII and AII 2) flt -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-faults This is the namespace for the SOAP header block generated by mustUnderstand faults. Used for NotUnderstood eii 3) upg -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-upgrade This is the namespace for the SOAP header block generated by VersionMismatch faults. Used for: Upgrade eii Envelope eii (child of Upgrade eii) 4) enc -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding This is the namespace for SOAP encoding. Used for: itemType aii. arraySize aii. 5) rpc -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-rpc This is the namespace for RPC. Used for: result eii. ProcedureNotPresent fault Subcode BadArguments fault Subcode 6) context -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/bindingFramework/ExchangeContext/ This namespace is used for defining properties which apply to a message exchange context: ExchangePatternName FailureReason Role State 7) mep -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/ Not used. 8) fail -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/FailureReasons/ Not used any more. 9) reqres -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/ This is the namespace for the request-response MEP. It is used for defining properties which apply to the request-response mep (those properties are also used in the SOAP Response MEP): reqres:OutboundMessage reqres:InboundMessage reqres:ImmediateDestination reqres:ImmediateSender 10) webmeth -- http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/features/web-method/ This is the namespace for the Web Method feature. It is used for defining one property: webmeth:Method Proposal -------- Here is a proposal for dealing with all those namespaces. This proposal was cut into pieces to allow a finer grained decision process. (i) Keep http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope namespace (ii) Merge http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-faults namespace and http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-upgrade namespace into http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope namespace. <rationale> This remove two namespaces. Both are used in the main part of the SOAP 1.2 specification and are tightly linked with the processing of SOAP messages. </rationale> (iii) Keep http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding namespace. <rationale> This namespace is used for defining aii in an independant part of the spec. </rationale> (iv) Keep http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-rpc namespace. <rationale> This namespace is used for defining an eii in an independant part of the spec. </rationale> (v) Remove http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/ namespace and http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/FailureReasons/ namespace. <rationale> They are not used anymore. </rationale> (vi) Define properties using URIs and not QNames (see first part of proposal), and remove http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/bindingFramework/ExchangeContext/ namespace, http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/ namespace and http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/features/web-method/ namespace which are only used for defining properties. <rationale> It seems better to identify properties with URIs than with QNames. </rationale> Conclusion ---------- Depending on the choices made over this proposal, we can have from 3 to 8 namespaces defined in the spec. Best regards, Hervé. [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x277 [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.xml [3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part2.xml
Received on Thursday, 17 October 2002 22:15:54 UTC