- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:57:25 -0700
- To: "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Herve Ruellan" <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I agree that this would be a consistent model but I think it would require changes to the current model based on qualified names described in part 1, section 2.8: "The version of a SOAP message is identified by the qualified name of the child element information item of the document information item. A SOAP Version 1.2 message has a child element information item of the document information item with a [local name] of Envelope and a [namespace name] of "http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope" (see 5.1 SOAP Envelope)." If I recall, the reason for going with a qualified name was to clarify that <S:HenriksEnvelope xmlns:S="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope"> would result in a S:VersionMismatch and not a S:Sender fault. Using a qualified name could also be seen as being more consistent with out treatment of header blocks. >I disagree, the namespace of the envelope defines the version >of SOAP - >any future version of SOAP that added new elements or changed element >names would also have to change the namespace. The upgrade >header block >just declares support for a particular version and hence only the >namespace is required - claiming to support that version means >supporting changed or multiple root elements so there's no need to >mention them explicitly. Henrik [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.xml#envvermodel
Received on Friday, 18 October 2002 12:58:01 UTC