- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 09:37:20 -0400
- To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
On Monday 16 September 2002 09:27 am, Martin Gudgin wrote: > You raised an issue[1] against the SOAP 1.2 Part 1 Last Call spec[2]. > The editors have decided to resolve this issue by taking no action. SOAP > does rely on XML base and RFC 2396 for dealing with relative URIs. The > editors did not consider it necessary to say anything about payload > boundaries in this specification. > > Please let the WG know ASAP if this resolution is not acceptable. It's useful when responding to comments if a WG can respond to the substantive aspects so we ensure we at least have an understanding. Did the WG choose to take no action because the think subsetting/detachment processes (such as a removing a payload, or a partial XML Signature) will *not* break across boundaries, or they agree that they will but it is not their concern? > Regards > > Martin Gudgin > For the XML Protocol Working Group > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x253 > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/ -- Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/ W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature/ W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Monday, 16 September 2002 09:37:22 UTC