131Re: SOAP Spec section 3
- Mar 21, 2001It reads like this:
It (A SOAP application) MAY process SOAP messages without SOAP
namespaces as though they had the correct SOAP namespaces.
Simon is absolutely correct in pointing out that namespaces for both
envelope and serialization are not REQUIRED.
--- In soapbuilders@y..., keithba@m... wrote:
> You mean MAY below, right? Not MUST?
> From http://www.normos.org/ietf/rfc/rfc2119.txt:
> 1. MUST This word, or the terms "REQUIRED" or "SHALL", mean that
> definition is an absolute requirement of the specification.
> --- In soapbuilders@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
> > So, i was re-reading the spec again, and noticed that the SOAP
> > namespace is a MUST not a REQUIRED, and that you MAY treat a SOAP
> > request with no namespace qualifications, as a real SOAP request,
> > you can choose to accept the following as a real soap request.
> > <Envelope>
> > <Body>
> > <Add><a>1</a><b>1</b></Add>
> > </Body>
> > </Envelope>
> > Is anyone aware of any implementations that allow this ?
> > Cheers
> > Simon
- << Previous post in topic