- From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:23:45 -0700
- To: www-tag@w3.org, w3c-xml-cg@w3.org
- Cc: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
The XML Protocol Working Group would like to call the attention of the TAG and XML Co-ordination Group to the issues we've encountered regarding the use of XML 1.1. Recently, the Working Group decided to limit the payload of SOAP 1.2 envelopes to those XML Infosets that can be serialised using XML 1.0. In other words, while a binding can use XML 1.1 to transport a SOAP 1.2 envelope, no SOAP 1.2 envelope can take advantage of any of the parts of XML 1.1 that mandate a change in the Infoset (e.g., internationalised element and attribute names, extra characters). The primary reason for this difficult decision was XML Schema's inability to describe XML 1.1 constructs; because there are normative constraints reflected in our Schema, we felt it unwise to make it non-normative. In the Working Group's view, this highlights a growing misalignment in the XML architecture. Until the advent of XML 1.1, XML 1.0 was a single point of constraint in the XML stack, with all of the benefits (e.g., interoperability, simplicity) that implies. Because XML 1.1 has introduced variability where before there was only one choice, other standards now need to explicitly identify what versions of XML they are compatible with. This may lead to a chicken-and-egg problem; until there is a complete stack of XML 1.1-capable standards available, it is problematic to use it. Furthermore, XML-based applications will likewise need to identify their capabilities and constraints; unfortunately, there is no consistent way to do this in the Web architecture (e.g., RFC3023 does not provide a means of specifying XML versions in media types). As a result, we urge the TAG and XML Co-ordination group to carefully consider what mechanisms are necessary to support XML 1.1, how XML 1.1-based standards should be packaged and presented by the W3C, and whether the benefits of a single point of constraint on the XML architecture can be re-introduced. On behalf of the XML Protocol Working Group, -- Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist Office of the CTO BEA Systems
Received on Wednesday, 19 May 2004 13:23:48 UTC