Jacek, You raised an issue 479 on the "SOAP Resource Representation Header" specification[1]. > 1) section 1.2 needs to be filled It has been filled, see the editors' copy [2] > 2) Section 2.1 talks about extracted content but makes no reference to > XOP or MTOM, a reader new to these specs and starting with > Representation header would have no idea what is being talked about. Fixed, "extracted content" has been replaced by "resource" > 3) Representation header is not a SOAP module, I think it would be > beneficial for describing the messages (say in WSDL) if it had a formal > name. Fixed, the document now defines a SOAP Feature and a SOAP Module. The name of the specification has been changed to reflect that, it is now "Resource Representation SOAP Header Block" > 4) in section 2.2, should it be said that namespace-qualified elements > and attributes on Rep elements must not be in Rep namespace? The schema has been changed to reflect that, see [3] > 5) section 2.3 should probably be marked informative Done (by mean of stating that it is an example) > 6) section 2.3.3, the example should probably be inside > rep:Representation element Done. I trust this addresses your concern. Regards (For the XMLP Working Group) [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-soap12-rep-20040608/ [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/3/06/Attachments/Representation.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2004Jun/0059.html -- Yves Lafon - W3C "Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras."Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 10:17:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:14:17 UTC