- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 17:04:12 -0500
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: xmlp-comments@w3.org
On today's conference call, the WG proposed a resolution of issue 174. The proposed resolution is to adopt language based on the following text from my email [2]: Text from Email: ""attributes in the SOAP envelope described by "Part 1: Framework" are are of types from XML Schema: Datatypes (e.g. mustUnderstand is a boolean). Unless otherwise stated, all lexical forms are supported for each such attribute, and lexical forms representing the same value in the XML Schema value space are considered equivalent for purposes of SOAP processing. Thus, the boolean lexical forms "1" and "true" [ref to boolean datatype in the schema spec] are interchangeable. For brevity, text in this specification refers only to one lexical form for each value (e.g. "if the value of mustUnderstand is "true"). Unless otherwise stated, such references implicitly cover all forms corresponding to the same value in the value space. However, when a header block is relayed by an intermediary [see section 2.6], the lexical form of any attributes within that block MUST be preserved." The proposed resolution is to eliminate the last sentence from the text above, and to provide the rest as input to the editorial team. Additionally, we will open a new issue (see [3]) covering the broader question of what can change when a header is relayed by an intermediary. In resolving that issue, we should settle the specific question of whether the lexical representation of an attribute value may be changed. [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x174 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Dec/0205.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Jan/0124.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2002 17:16:29 UTC