Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

DOT NET Dump +Questions

Expand Messages
  • W. Matthew Long
    Three items. 1) I sent an unresolved namespace s:int in the request, which correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request. Shouldn t it? 2) The
    Message 1 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Three items.

      1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
      correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
      Shouldn't it?

      2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was that
      the intent?

      3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
      namespace "s:int"?

      ********REQUEST************
      ?oClient.requestXML.xml
      <?xml version="1.0"?>
      <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
      ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
      ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
      xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
      xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-instance">
      <SOAP-ENV:Body>
      <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
      <inputInteger
      xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
      </ns:echoInteger>
      </SOAP-ENV:Body>
      </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>


      ************Response************
      <?xml version="1.0"?>
      <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
      xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
      xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
      xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
      <soap:Body
      soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
      <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
      <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
      </echoIntegerResponse>
      </soap:Body>
      </soap:Envelope>
    • keithba@microsoft.com
      ... We don t use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to determine type. From the spec: A simple value is represented as character data, that is,
      Message 2 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
        > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
        > Shouldn't it?
        We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
        determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
        character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple value
        must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
        Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
        (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then, right?

        >
        > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was that
        > the intent?
        Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements are
        in a null namespace.

        >
        > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
        > namespace "s:int"?
        Good question. I don't know.

        >
        > ********REQUEST************
        > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
        > <?xml version="1.0"?>
        > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
        > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
        > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
        > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
        > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
        instance">
        > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
        > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
        > <inputInteger
        > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
        > </ns:echoInteger>
        > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
        > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
        >
        >
        > ************Response************
        > <?xml version="1.0"?>
        > <soap:Envelope
        xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
        > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
        > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
        > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
        > <soap:Body
        > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
        > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
        > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
        > </echoIntegerResponse>
        > </soap:Body>
        > </soap:Envelope>
      • Aleksander Slominski
        ... as it seems from wiredump that xsi:type= s:int is in namespace xmlns:xsi= - instance therefore it is an attribute that has nothing to do with XML
        Message 3 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          keithba@... wrote:

          > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
          > > namespace "s:int"?
          > Good question. I don't know.

          as it seems from wiredump that xsi:type="s:int" is in namespace xmlns:xsi="-
          instance" therefore it is an attribute that has nothing to do with XML
          Schema-instance type attribute and i would think that it can be safely
          ignored (or it can not?) - SOAP 1.1 spec is not too clear on that:

          (...) A SOAP message MUST NOT contain a Document Type Declaration. A SOAP
          message MUST NOT contain Processing Instructions. [7]
          (...) With the exception of the SOAP mustUnderstand attribute (see section
          4.2.3) and the SOAP actor attribute (see section 4.2.2), it is generally
          permissible to have attributes and their values appear in XML instances or
          alternatively in schemas, with equal effect. That is, declaration in a
          DTD or schema with a default or fixed value is semantically equivalent to
          appearance in an instance. (...)

          so unless doing full DTD or/and schema validation (and it is discouraged with
          MUST NOT) it is hard to say if attribute is allowed or not in some XML
          schema...

          thanks,

          alek
          --
          Aleksander Slominski, LH 316, IU, http://www.extreme.indiana.edu/~aslom
          As I look afar I see neither cherry Nor tinted leaves Just a modest hut
          on the coast In the dusk of Autumn nightfall - Fujiwara no Teika (1162-1241)
        • Matt Long
          This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my implementation up. 3 It would seem to me that if WSDL
          Message 4 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my implementation
            up.

            <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>

            It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
            "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do the
            same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type ("s","xsd","whatever") is
            namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request which must
            be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app would
            check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution of "xsi:type"
            (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
            resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or am I being
            hyper-anal about this?



            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: keithba@... [mailto:keithba@...]
            > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
            > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
            >
            >
            > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
            > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
            > > Shouldn't it?
            > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
            > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
            > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple value
            > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
            > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
            > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then, right?
            >
            > >
            > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was that
            > > the intent?
            > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements are
            > in a null namespace.
            >
            > >
            > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
            > > namespace "s:int"?
            > Good question. I don't know.
            >
            > >
            > > ********REQUEST************
            > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
            > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
            > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
            > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
            > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
            > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
            > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
            > instance">
            > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
            > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
            > > <inputInteger
            > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
            > > </ns:echoInteger>
            > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
            > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
            > >
            > >
            > > ************Response************
            > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
            > > <soap:Envelope
            > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
            > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
            > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
            > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
            > > <soap:Body
            > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
            > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
            > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
            > > </echoIntegerResponse>
            > > </soap:Body>
            > > </soap:Envelope>
            >
            >
            > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > ---------------------~-~>
            > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
            > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
            > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
            > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
            > --------------------------------------------------------------
            > -------_->
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • keithba@microsoft.com
            1) Please put your implementation up! 2) I m not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are
            Message 5 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              1) Please put your implementation up!

              2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
              to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.

              3) Please put your implementation up!

              --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
              > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
              implementation
              > up.
              >
              > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
              >
              > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
              > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
              the
              > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
              ("s","xsd","whatever") is
              > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
              which must
              > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
              would
              > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
              of "xsi:type"
              > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
              > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
              am I being
              > hyper-anal about this?
              >
              >
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
              > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
              > > To: soapbuilders@y...
              > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
              > >
              > >
              > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
              > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
              > > > Shouldn't it?
              > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
              > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
              > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
              value
              > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
              > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
              > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
              right?
              > >
              > > >
              > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
              that
              > > > the intent?
              > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
              are
              > > in a null namespace.
              > >
              > > >
              > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
              > > > namespace "s:int"?
              > > Good question. I don't know.
              > >
              > > >
              > > > ********REQUEST************
              > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
              > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
              > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
              > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
              > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
              > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
              > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
              > > instance">
              > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
              > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
              > > > <inputInteger
              > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
              > > > </ns:echoInteger>
              > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
              > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > ************Response************
              > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
              > > > <soap:Envelope
              > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
              > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
              > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
              > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
              > > > <soap:Body
              > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
              > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
              > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
              > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
              > > > </soap:Body>
              > > > </soap:Envelope>
              > >
              > >
              > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              > > ---------------------~-~>
              > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
              > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
              > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
              > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
              > > --------------------------------------------------------------
              > > -------_->
              > >
              > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            • Andrew Layman
              I d need to check, and this is a subtle issue so I ve copied another expert, Allen Brown, but it is probably a validation error to have an xsi:type attribute
              Message 6 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                I'd need to check, and this is a subtle issue so I've copied another expert,
                Allen Brown, but it is probably a validation error to have an xsi:type
                attribute with an invalid value. The subtlety is that validation is up to
                the server, but I wonder whether it is valid for a server to advertise
                itself as a SOAP server and yet use a schema that is less specific than the
                SOAP schema. In any case, even if not mandated by the specification, it
                certainly seems odd and poor diagnostics to ignore the attribute.

                Regarding the comment that "subelements are in a null namespace," this is
                not technically accurate. There is no concept of a "null namespace." What
                is true is that SOAP section 5 says that accessors are represented by
                unqualified elements. Your XML usage is correct; I'm just being picky about
                the phrasing. :-)


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: <keithba@...>
                To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:38 PM
                Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                > Shouldn't it?
                We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple value
                must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then, right?

                >
                > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was that
                > the intent?
                Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements are
                in a null namespace.

                >
                > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                > namespace "s:int"?
                Good question. I don't know.

                >
                > ********REQUEST************
                > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                instance">
                > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                > <inputInteger
                > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                > </ns:echoInteger>
                > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                >
                >
                > ************Response************
                > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                > <soap:Envelope
                xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                > <soap:Body
                > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                > </echoIntegerResponse>
                > </soap:Body>
                > </soap:Envelope>



                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Andrew Layman
                s must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace declaration, even if the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI. ... From:
                Message 7 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace declaration, even if
                  the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: <keithba@...>
                  To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                  Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                  1) Please put your implementation up!

                  2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                  to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.

                  3) Please put your implementation up!

                  --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                  > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                  implementation
                  > up.
                  >
                  > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                  >
                  > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                  > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                  the
                  > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                  ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                  > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                  which must
                  > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                  would
                  > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                  of "xsi:type"
                  > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                  > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                  am I being
                  > hyper-anal about this?
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                  > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                  > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                  > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                  > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                  > > > Shouldn't it?
                  > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                  > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                  > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                  value
                  > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                  > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                  > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                  right?
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                  that
                  > > > the intent?
                  > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                  are
                  > > in a null namespace.
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                  > > > namespace "s:int"?
                  > > Good question. I don't know.
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > > ********REQUEST************
                  > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                  > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                  > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                  > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                  > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                  > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                  > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                  > > instance">
                  > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                  > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                  > > > <inputInteger
                  > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                  > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                  > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                  > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > ************Response************
                  > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                  > > > <soap:Envelope
                  > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                  > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                  > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                  > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                  > > > <soap:Body
                  > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                  > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                  > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                  > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                  > > > </soap:Body>
                  > > > </soap:Envelope>
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                  > > ---------------------~-~>
                  > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                  > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                  > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                  > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                  > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                  > > -------_->
                  > >
                  > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                  > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                • Matt Long
                  ok, that s what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying that the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e., s s
                  Message 8 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying that
                    the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e.,
                    "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the resolution of the
                    typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is WSDL aware.


                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                    > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                    > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                    >
                    >
                    > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                    > declaration, even if
                    > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                    >
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: <keithba@...>
                    > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                    > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                    > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                    >
                    >
                    > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                    >
                    > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                    > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                    >
                    > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                    >
                    > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                    > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                    > implementation
                    > > up.
                    > >
                    > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                    > >
                    > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                    > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                    > the
                    > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                    > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                    > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                    > which must
                    > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                    > would
                    > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                    > of "xsi:type"
                    > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                    > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                    > am I being
                    > > hyper-anal about this?
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                    > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                    > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                    > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                    > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                    > > > > Shouldn't it?
                    > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                    > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                    > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                    > value
                    > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                    > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                    > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                    > right?
                    > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                    > that
                    > > > > the intent?
                    > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                    > are
                    > > > in a null namespace.
                    > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                    > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                    > > > Good question. I don't know.
                    > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > ********REQUEST************
                    > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                    > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                    > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                    > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                    > > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                    > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                    > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                    > > > instance">
                    > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                    > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                    > > > > <inputInteger
                    > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                    > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                    > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                    > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > ************Response************
                    > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                    > > > > <soap:Envelope
                    > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                    > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                    > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                    > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                    > > > > <soap:Body
                    > > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                    > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                    > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                    > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                    > > > > </soap:Body>
                    > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                    > > > ---------------------~-~>
                    > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                    > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                    > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                    > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                    > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                    > > > -------_->
                    > > >
                    > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                    > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  • Glen Daniels
                    Hm - I think not necessarily may be the answer for this part. I think it may be fine to have a concept of out of band type equivalence between any two
                    Message 9 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.

                      I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type equivalence"
                      between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If your WSDL specifies
                      an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I send you "data:int"
                      where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my server be able to deal
                      with that as long as I've got the deserialization infrastructure to cope? If I
                      understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should be able to do my
                      best to deal with the request.

                      Another example of this would be type specializations. You specify a
                      "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of band to the WSDL) I
                      define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of "foo:type1". If my server
                      can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the argument, no?

                      --Glen

                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                      To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                      Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                      > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying that
                      > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e.,
                      > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the resolution of the
                      > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is WSDL aware.
                      >
                      >
                      > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                      > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                      > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                      > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                      > > declaration, even if
                      > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > ----- Original Message -----
                      > > From: <keithba@...>
                      > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                      > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                      > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                      > >
                      > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                      > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                      > >
                      > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                      > >
                      > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                      > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                      > > implementation
                      > > > up.
                      > > >
                      > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                      > > >
                      > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                      > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                      > > the
                      > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                      > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                      > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                      > > which must
                      > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                      > > would
                      > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                      > > of "xsi:type"
                      > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                      > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                      > > am I being
                      > > > hyper-anal about this?
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                      > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                      > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                      > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                      > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                      > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                      > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                      > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                      > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                      > > value
                      > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                      > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                      > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                      > > right?
                      > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                      > > that
                      > > > > > the intent?
                      > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                      > > are
                      > > > > in a null namespace.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                      > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                      > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                      > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                      > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                      > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                      > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                      > > > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                      > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                      > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                      > > > > instance">
                      > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                      > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                      > > > > > <inputInteger
                      > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                      > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                      > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                      > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > ************Response************
                      > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                      > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                      > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                      > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                      > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                      > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                      > > > > > <soap:Body
                      > > > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                      > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                      > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                      > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                      > > > > > </soap:Body>
                      > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                      > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                      > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                      > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                      > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                      > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                      > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                      > > > > -------_->
                      > > > >
                      > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                      > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                    • Andrew Layman
                      Yes, though, respecting that SOAP and WSDL are two different specifications, if the type in the SOAP message does not match the type required by the WSDL file,
                      Message 10 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Yes, though, respecting that SOAP and WSDL are two different specifications,
                        if the type in the SOAP message does not match the type required by the WSDL
                        file, the error is not exactly a SOAP error by a failure of the message to
                        match the contract demanded by the recipient, a contract that goes beyond
                        mere SOAP validity and adds some further requirements. In effect, this error
                        is equivalent to sending a RosettaNet Purchase Order to the UserLand SOAP
                        validator server. It is not that the message violates the SOAP
                        specification, but rather that it violates the requirements of that
                        particular server.


                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                        To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:25 PM
                        Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                        ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying that
                        the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e.,
                        "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the resolution of the
                        typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is WSDL aware.


                        > -----Original Message-----
                        > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                        > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                        > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                        >
                        >
                        > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                        > declaration, even if
                        > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                        >
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: <keithba@...>
                        > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                        > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                        > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                        >
                        >
                        > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                        >
                        > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                        > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                        >
                        > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                        >
                        > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                        > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                        > implementation
                        > > up.
                        > >
                        > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                        > >
                        > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                        > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                        > the
                        > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                        > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                        > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                        > which must
                        > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                        > would
                        > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                        > of "xsi:type"
                        > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                        > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                        > am I being
                        > > hyper-anal about this?
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > > -----Original Message-----
                        > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                        > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                        > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                        > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                        > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                        > > > > Shouldn't it?
                        > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                        > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                        > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                        > value
                        > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                        > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                        > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                        > right?
                        > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                        > that
                        > > > > the intent?
                        > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                        > are
                        > > > in a null namespace.
                        > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                        > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                        > > > Good question. I don't know.
                        > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > ********REQUEST************
                        > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                        > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                        > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                        > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                        > > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                        > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                        > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                        > > > instance">
                        > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                        > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                        > > > > <inputInteger
                        > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                        > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                        > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                        > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > ************Response************
                        > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                        > > > > <soap:Envelope
                        > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                        > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                        > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                        > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                        > > > > <soap:Body
                        > > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                        > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                        > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                        > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                        > > > > </soap:Body>
                        > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                        > > > ---------------------~-~>
                        > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                        > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                        > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                        > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                        > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                        > > > -------_->
                        > > >
                        > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                        > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






                        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      • Simon Fell
                        I ve been round in circles on this one as well, it sounds like 4s4c does the same as .NET. I keep thinking that there s going to be some type conversion
                        Message 11 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I've been round in circles on this one as well, it sounds like 4s4c
                          does the same as .NET. I keep thinking that there's going to be some
                          type conversion problem with just ignoring the type specified.

                          Cheers
                          Simon


                          On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 03:04:54 -0000, in soap you wrote:

                          >1) Please put your implementation up!
                          >
                          >2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                          >to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                          >
                          >3) Please put your implementation up!
                          >
                          >--- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                          >> This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                          >implementation
                          >> up.
                          >>
                          >> <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                          >>
                          >> It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                          >> "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                          >the
                          >> same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                          >("s","xsd","whatever") is
                          >> namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                          >which must
                          >> be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                          >would
                          >> check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                          >of "xsi:type"
                          >> (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                          >> resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                          >am I being
                          >> hyper-anal about this?
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >> > -----Original Message-----
                          >> > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                          >> > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                          >> > To: soapbuilders@y...
                          >> > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                          >> >
                          >> >
                          >> > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                          >> > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                          >> > > Shouldn't it?
                          >> > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                          >> > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                          >> > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                          >value
                          >> > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                          >> > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                          >> > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                          >right?
                          >> >
                          >> > >
                          >> > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                          >that
                          >> > > the intent?
                          >> > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                          >are
                          >> > in a null namespace.
                          >> >
                          >> > >
                          >> > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                          >> > > namespace "s:int"?
                          >> > Good question. I don't know.
                          >> >
                          >> > >
                          >> > > ********REQUEST************
                          >> > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                          >> > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                          >> > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                          >> > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                          >> > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                          >> > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                          >> > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                          >> > instance">
                          >> > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                          >> > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                          >> > > <inputInteger
                          >> > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                          >> > > </ns:echoInteger>
                          >> > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                          >> > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                          >> > >
                          >> > >
                          >> > > ************Response************
                          >> > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                          >> > > <soap:Envelope
                          >> > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                          >> > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                          >> > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                          >> > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                          >> > > <soap:Body
                          >> > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                          >> > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                          >> > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                          >> > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                          >> > > </soap:Body>
                          >> > > </soap:Envelope>
                          >> >
                          >> >
                          >> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                          >> > ---------------------~-~>
                          >> > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                          >> > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                          >> > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                          >> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                          >> > --------------------------------------------------------------
                          >> > -------_->
                          >> >
                          >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          >> > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                          >> >
                          >> >
                          >> >
                          >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                          >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                        • Matt Long
                          But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to something it s not? ...quagmire? Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get
                          Message 12 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to
                            something it's not?
                            ...quagmire?

                            Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get some resolution to
                            it as I'm loosing both sleep and hair ;-) over it.



                            > -----Original Message-----
                            > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@...]
                            > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:35 PM
                            > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                            > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                            >
                            >
                            > Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.
                            >
                            > I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type
                            > equivalence"
                            > between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If
                            > your WSDL specifies
                            > an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I
                            > send you "data:int"
                            > where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my
                            > server be able to deal
                            > with that as long as I've got the deserialization
                            > infrastructure to cope? If I
                            > understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should
                            > be able to do my
                            > best to deal with the request.
                            >
                            > Another example of this would be type specializations. You specify a
                            > "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of
                            > band to the WSDL) I
                            > define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of
                            > "foo:type1". If my server
                            > can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the argument, no?
                            >
                            > --Glen
                            >
                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                            > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                            > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                            > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                            >
                            >
                            > > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes
                            > without saying that
                            > > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the
                            > request,i.e.,
                            > > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the
                            > resolution of the
                            > > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is
                            > WSDL aware.
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > > -----Original Message-----
                            > > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                            > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                            > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                            > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                            > > > declaration, even if
                            > > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > ----- Original Message -----
                            > > > From: <keithba@...>
                            > > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                            > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                            > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                            > > >
                            > > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There
                            > are times
                            > > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                            > > >
                            > > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                            > > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                            > > > implementation
                            > > > > up.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                            > > > >
                            > > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                            > > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server
                            > would have to do
                            > > > the
                            > > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                            > > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                            > > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                            > > > which must
                            > > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL.
                            > Currently, my app
                            > > > would
                            > > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                            > > > of "xsi:type"
                            > > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I
                            > think the actual
                            > > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it
                            > this way or
                            > > > am I being
                            > > > > hyper-anal about this?
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > > -----Original Message-----
                            > > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                            > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                            > > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                            > > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the
                            > request, which
                            > > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on
                            > the request.
                            > > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                            > > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the
                            > schema (WSDL) to
                            > > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is
                            > represented as
                            > > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                            > > > value
                            > > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                            > > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is
                            > listed therein
                            > > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                            > > > right?
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is
                            > matters, but was
                            > > > that
                            > > > > > > the intent?
                            > > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the
                            > sub elements
                            > > > are
                            > > > > > in a null namespace.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                            > > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                            > > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                            > > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                            > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                            > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                            > > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                            > > > > > >
                            > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                            > > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                            > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                            > > > > > instance">
                            > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                            > > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                            > > > > > > <inputInteger
                            > > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                            > > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                            > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                            > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > ************Response************
                            > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                            > > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                            > > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                            > > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                            > > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                            > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                            > > > > > > <soap:Body
                            > > > > > >
                            > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                            > > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                            > > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                            > > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                            > > > > > > </soap:Body>
                            > > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                            > > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                            > > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                            > > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                            > > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                            > > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                            > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                            > > > > > -------_->
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            > > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                            > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                            > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            >
                            >



                            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          • Andrew Layman
                            Yes, within the limitation that all SOAP servers must at least respect the rules of SOAP, a server may validate a message according to whatever higher level
                            Message 13 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Yes, within the limitation that all SOAP servers must at least respect the
                              rules of SOAP, a server may validate a message according to whatever higher
                              level rules it likes. Naturally, we'd like some standard way for the server
                              to publish those rules, and that is one of the functions of WSDL.

                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@...>
                              To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:35 PM
                              Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                              Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.

                              I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type equivalence"
                              between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If your WSDL
                              specifies
                              an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I send you
                              "data:int"
                              where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my server be able to
                              deal
                              with that as long as I've got the deserialization infrastructure to cope?
                              If I
                              understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should be able to do my
                              best to deal with the request.

                              Another example of this would be type specializations. You specify a
                              "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of band to the WSDL)
                              I
                              define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of "foo:type1". If my
                              server
                              can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the argument, no?

                              --Glen

                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                              To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                              Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                              > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying
                              that
                              > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e.,
                              > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the resolution of
                              the
                              > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is WSDL aware.
                              >
                              >
                              > > -----Original Message-----
                              > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                              > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                              > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                              > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                              > > declaration, even if
                              > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > ----- Original Message -----
                              > > From: <keithba@...>
                              > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                              > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                              > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                              > >
                              > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                              > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                              > >
                              > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                              > >
                              > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                              > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                              > > implementation
                              > > > up.
                              > > >
                              > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                              > > >
                              > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                              > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                              > > the
                              > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                              > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                              > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                              > > which must
                              > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                              > > would
                              > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                              > > of "xsi:type"
                              > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                              > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                              > > am I being
                              > > > hyper-anal about this?
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > > -----Original Message-----
                              > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                              > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                              > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                              > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                              > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                              > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                              > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                              > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                              > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                              > > value
                              > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                              > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                              > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                              > > right?
                              > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                              > > that
                              > > > > > the intent?
                              > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                              > > are
                              > > > > in a null namespace.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                              > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                              > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                              > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                              > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                              > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                              > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                              > > > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                              > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                              > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                              > > > > instance">
                              > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                              > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                              > > > > > <inputInteger
                              > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                              > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                              > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                              > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > ************Response************
                              > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                              > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                              > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                              > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                              > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                              > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                              > > > > > <soap:Body
                              > > > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                              > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                              > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                              > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                              > > > > > </soap:Body>
                              > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                              > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                              > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                              > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                              > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                              > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                              > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                              > > > > -------_->
                              > > > >
                              > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                              > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              >
                              >



                              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            • Glen Daniels
                              ... Pilot error. If I send you frank That s clearly an error on my part. Type systems require both sides to agree in some
                              Message 14 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                              • 0 Attachment
                                > But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to
                                > something it's not?
                                > ...quagmire?

                                Pilot error. If I send you

                                <arg xsi:type="xsd:double">frank</arg>

                                That's clearly an error on my part. Type systems require both sides to agree
                                in some "magical" way that a particular QName means a particular data type. If
                                that agreement falters, then all bets are off.

                                > Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get some resolution to
                                > it as I'm loosing both sleep and hair ;-) over it.

                                The simple way to deal is require an exact match of the namespace part and the
                                local part of the type QName. I think that's fine for now, although a slightly
                                more complex system which can at least deal with understanding the equivalence
                                of the various schema spec URIs would be a bit more robust.

                                --Glen
                              • Andrew Layman
                                By the way, XML has a principle called Draconian Error Handling that is more restrictive than the very generous be liberal in what you accept philosophy
                                Message 15 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  By the way, XML has a principle called "Draconian Error Handling" that is
                                  more restrictive than the very generous "be liberal in what you accept"
                                  philosophy exemplified by most HTML browsers. The XML rule is that readers
                                  should not try to work around most errors, but should instead simply reject
                                  the XML. The purpose of this is to avoid the establishment of subtle,
                                  possibly undocumented and unofficial behaviors and accompanying very
                                  complicated code that come to be part of an ambiguous yet semi-de-facto
                                  standard, much as Netscape's and later other's peculiarities in the handling
                                  of weird XML became.

                                  More precisely, there is a class of errors called "fatal errors" and
                                  conforming processors must handle these as described in the XML 1.0
                                  specification, terminology section,
                                  http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-terminology.


                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                  To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:37 PM
                                  Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                                  But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to
                                  something it's not?
                                  ..quagmire?

                                  Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get some resolution to
                                  it as I'm loosing both sleep and hair ;-) over it.



                                  > -----Original Message-----
                                  > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@...]
                                  > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:35 PM
                                  > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                  > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.
                                  >
                                  > I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type
                                  > equivalence"
                                  > between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If
                                  > your WSDL specifies
                                  > an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I
                                  > send you "data:int"
                                  > where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my
                                  > server be able to deal
                                  > with that as long as I've got the deserialization
                                  > infrastructure to cope? If I
                                  > understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should
                                  > be able to do my
                                  > best to deal with the request.
                                  >
                                  > Another example of this would be type specializations. You specify a
                                  > "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of
                                  > band to the WSDL) I
                                  > define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of
                                  > "foo:type1". If my server
                                  > can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the argument, no?
                                  >
                                  > --Glen
                                  >
                                  > ----- Original Message -----
                                  > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                  > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                                  > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes
                                  > without saying that
                                  > > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the
                                  > request,i.e.,
                                  > > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the
                                  > resolution of the
                                  > > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is
                                  > WSDL aware.
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > > -----Original Message-----
                                  > > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                  > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                                  > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                  > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                                  > > > declaration, even if
                                  > > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > ----- Original Message -----
                                  > > > From: <keithba@...>
                                  > > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                                  > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There
                                  > are times
                                  > > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                                  > > >
                                  > > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                                  > > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                                  > > > implementation
                                  > > > > up.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                                  > > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server
                                  > would have to do
                                  > > > the
                                  > > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                                  > > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                                  > > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                                  > > > which must
                                  > > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL.
                                  > Currently, my app
                                  > > > would
                                  > > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                                  > > > of "xsi:type"
                                  > > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I
                                  > think the actual
                                  > > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it
                                  > this way or
                                  > > > am I being
                                  > > > > hyper-anal about this?
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                  > > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                                  > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                                  > > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                                  > > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the
                                  > request, which
                                  > > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on
                                  > the request.
                                  > > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                                  > > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the
                                  > schema (WSDL) to
                                  > > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is
                                  > represented as
                                  > > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                                  > > > value
                                  > > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                  > > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is
                                  > listed therein
                                  > > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                                  > > > right?
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is
                                  > matters, but was
                                  > > > that
                                  > > > > > > the intent?
                                  > > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the
                                  > sub elements
                                  > > > are
                                  > > > > > in a null namespace.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                  > > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                                  > > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                                  > > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                  > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                  > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                  > > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                  > > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                  > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                                  > > > > > instance">
                                  > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                  > > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                  > > > > > > <inputInteger
                                  > > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                  > > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                  > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                  > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > > > > > > ************Response************
                                  > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                  > > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                                  > > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                  > > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                  > > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                  > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                  > > > > > > <soap:Body
                                  > > > > > >
                                  > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                  > > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                  > > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                  > > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                  > > > > > > </soap:Body>
                                  > > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                  > > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                                  > > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                                  > > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                                  > > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                                  > > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                                  > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                                  > > > > > -------_->
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > >
                                  > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                  > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                  > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  >
                                  >



                                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                • Matt Long
                                  fatal error [Definition: An error which a conforming XML processor must detect and report to the application. After encountering a fatal error, the processor
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    fatal error
                                    [Definition: An error which a conforming XML processor must detect and
                                    report to the application. After encountering a fatal error, the processor
                                    may continue processing the data to search for further errors and may report
                                    such errors to the application. In order to support correction of errors,
                                    the processor may make unprocessed data from the document (with intermingled
                                    character data and markup) available to the application. Once a fatal error
                                    is detected, however, the processor must not continue normal processing
                                    (i.e., it must not continue to pass character data and information about the
                                    document's logical structure to the application in the normal way).]

                                    From this I see no middle ground. That said, implementation specific issues
                                    will exist, but XML and SOAP v1.1 issues should not. Therefore, in the case
                                    mentioned as example, the value of the xsi:type should not be "guessed" due
                                    to improper XML, it should be faulted.

                                    Is that a fair assessment?

                                    -Matt Long (Southern drawl accepted)




                                    > -----Original Message-----
                                    > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                    > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:56 PM
                                    > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                    > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > By the way, XML has a principle called "Draconian Error
                                    > Handling" that is
                                    > more restrictive than the very generous "be liberal in what
                                    > you accept"
                                    > philosophy exemplified by most HTML browsers. The XML rule
                                    > is that readers
                                    > should not try to work around most errors, but should instead
                                    > simply reject
                                    > the XML. The purpose of this is to avoid the establishment of subtle,
                                    > possibly undocumented and unofficial behaviors and accompanying very
                                    > complicated code that come to be part of an ambiguous yet
                                    > semi-de-facto
                                    > standard, much as Netscape's and later other's peculiarities
                                    > in the handling
                                    > of weird XML became.
                                    >
                                    > More precisely, there is a class of errors called "fatal errors" and
                                    > conforming processors must handle these as described in the XML 1.0
                                    > specification, terminology section,
                                    > http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-terminology.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ----- Original Message -----
                                    > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                    > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:37 PM
                                    > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to
                                    > something it's not?
                                    > ..quagmire?
                                    >
                                    > Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get some
                                    > resolution to
                                    > it as I'm loosing both sleep and hair ;-) over it.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > > -----Original Message-----
                                    > > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@...]
                                    > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:35 PM
                                    > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.
                                    > >
                                    > > I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type
                                    > > equivalence"
                                    > > between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If
                                    > > your WSDL specifies
                                    > > an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I
                                    > > send you "data:int"
                                    > > where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my
                                    > > server be able to deal
                                    > > with that as long as I've got the deserialization
                                    > > infrastructure to cope? If I
                                    > > understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should
                                    > > be able to do my
                                    > > best to deal with the request.
                                    > >
                                    > > Another example of this would be type specializations. You
                                    > specify a
                                    > > "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of
                                    > > band to the WSDL) I
                                    > > define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of
                                    > > "foo:type1". If my server
                                    > > can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the
                                    > argument, no?
                                    > >
                                    > > --Glen
                                    > >
                                    > > ----- Original Message -----
                                    > > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                    > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                                    > > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes
                                    > > without saying that
                                    > > > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the
                                    > > request,i.e.,
                                    > > > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the
                                    > > resolution of the
                                    > > > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is
                                    > > WSDL aware.
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                    > > > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                    > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                                    > > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                                    > > > > declaration, even if
                                    > > > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > ----- Original Message -----
                                    > > > > From: <keithba@...>
                                    > > > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                                    > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There
                                    > > are times
                                    > > > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                                    > > > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                                    > > > > implementation
                                    > > > > > up.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                                    > > > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server
                                    > > would have to do
                                    > > > > the
                                    > > > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                                    > > > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                                    > > > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in
                                    > the request
                                    > > > > which must
                                    > > > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL.
                                    > > Currently, my app
                                    > > > > would
                                    > > > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                                    > > > > of "xsi:type"
                                    > > > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I
                                    > > think the actual
                                    > > > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it
                                    > > this way or
                                    > > > > am I being
                                    > > > > > hyper-anal about this?
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                    > > > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                                    > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                                    > > > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                                    > > > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the
                                    > > request, which
                                    > > > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on
                                    > > the request.
                                    > > > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                                    > > > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the
                                    > > schema (WSDL) to
                                    > > > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is
                                    > > represented as
                                    > > > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements.
                                    > Every simple
                                    > > > > value
                                    > > > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                    > > > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is
                                    > > listed therein
                                    > > > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the
                                    > server then,
                                    > > > > right?
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is
                                    > > matters, but was
                                    > > > > that
                                    > > > > > > > the intent?
                                    > > > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the
                                    > > sub elements
                                    > > > > are
                                    > > > > > > in a null namespace.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                    > > > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                                    > > > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                                    > > > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                    > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                    > > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                    > > > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                    > > > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                    > > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema"
                                    > xmlns:xsi="-
                                    > > > > > > instance">
                                    > > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                    > > > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                    > > > > > > > <inputInteger
                                    > > > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                    > > > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                    > > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                    > > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > > ************Response************
                                    > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                    > > > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                                    > > > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                    > > > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                    > > > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                    > > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                    > > > > > > > <soap:Body
                                    > > > > > > >
                                    > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                    > > > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                    > > > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                    > > > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                    > > > > > > > </soap:Body>
                                    > > > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                    > > > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                                    > > > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                                    > > > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                                    > > > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                                    > > > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > --------------------------------------------------------------
                                    > > > > > > -------_->
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    > > > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > >
                                    > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                    > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                    > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                    > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                    >
                                    >



                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  • Andrew Layman
                                    We need to distinguish two things. If the content of the xsi:type attribute is not a valid qname, for example if the prefix is not in-scope bound to a URI
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      We need to distinguish two things. If the content of the xsi:type attribute
                                      is not a valid qname, for example if the prefix is not in-scope bound to a
                                      URI declared in a namespace declaration, then it is invalid by ordinary XML
                                      namespace and schema rules. But whether two types are known by the server
                                      to have a certain relation is up to the server to determine, subject of
                                      course to whatever rules it publishes about how it will process messages.


                                      ----- Original Message -----
                                      From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                      To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                      Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:13 PM
                                      Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                                      fatal error
                                      [Definition: An error which a conforming XML processor must detect and
                                      report to the application. After encountering a fatal error, the processor
                                      may continue processing the data to search for further errors and may report
                                      such errors to the application. In order to support correction of errors,
                                      the processor may make unprocessed data from the document (with intermingled
                                      character data and markup) available to the application. Once a fatal error
                                      is detected, however, the processor must not continue normal processing
                                      (i.e., it must not continue to pass character data and information about the
                                      document's logical structure to the application in the normal way).]

                                      >From this I see no middle ground. That said, implementation specific
                                      issues
                                      will exist, but XML and SOAP v1.1 issues should not. Therefore, in the case
                                      mentioned as example, the value of the xsi:type should not be "guessed" due
                                      to improper XML, it should be faulted.

                                      Is that a fair assessment?

                                      -Matt Long (Southern drawl accepted)




                                      > -----Original Message-----
                                      > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                      > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:56 PM
                                      > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                      > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > By the way, XML has a principle called "Draconian Error
                                      > Handling" that is
                                      > more restrictive than the very generous "be liberal in what
                                      > you accept"
                                      > philosophy exemplified by most HTML browsers. The XML rule
                                      > is that readers
                                      > should not try to work around most errors, but should instead
                                      > simply reject
                                      > the XML. The purpose of this is to avoid the establishment of subtle,
                                      > possibly undocumented and unofficial behaviors and accompanying very
                                      > complicated code that come to be part of an ambiguous yet
                                      > semi-de-facto
                                      > standard, much as Netscape's and later other's peculiarities
                                      > in the handling
                                      > of weird XML became.
                                      >
                                      > More precisely, there is a class of errors called "fatal errors" and
                                      > conforming processors must handle these as described in the XML 1.0
                                      > specification, terminology section,
                                      > http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-terminology.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                      > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:37 PM
                                      > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to
                                      > something it's not?
                                      > ..quagmire?
                                      >
                                      > Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get some
                                      > resolution to
                                      > it as I'm loosing both sleep and hair ;-) over it.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > > -----Original Message-----
                                      > > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@...]
                                      > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:35 PM
                                      > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.
                                      > >
                                      > > I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type
                                      > > equivalence"
                                      > > between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If
                                      > > your WSDL specifies
                                      > > an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I
                                      > > send you "data:int"
                                      > > where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my
                                      > > server be able to deal
                                      > > with that as long as I've got the deserialization
                                      > > infrastructure to cope? If I
                                      > > understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should
                                      > > be able to do my
                                      > > best to deal with the request.
                                      > >
                                      > > Another example of this would be type specializations. You
                                      > specify a
                                      > > "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of
                                      > > band to the WSDL) I
                                      > > define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of
                                      > > "foo:type1". If my server
                                      > > can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the
                                      > argument, no?
                                      > >
                                      > > --Glen
                                      > >
                                      > > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                      > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                                      > > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes
                                      > > without saying that
                                      > > > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the
                                      > > request,i.e.,
                                      > > > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the
                                      > > resolution of the
                                      > > > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is
                                      > > WSDL aware.
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                      > > > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                      > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                                      > > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                                      > > > > declaration, even if
                                      > > > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > > > > From: <keithba@...>
                                      > > > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                                      > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There
                                      > > are times
                                      > > > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                                      > > > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                                      > > > > implementation
                                      > > > > > up.
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                                      > > > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server
                                      > > would have to do
                                      > > > > the
                                      > > > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                                      > > > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                                      > > > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in
                                      > the request
                                      > > > > which must
                                      > > > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL.
                                      > > Currently, my app
                                      > > > > would
                                      > > > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                                      > > > > of "xsi:type"
                                      > > > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I
                                      > > think the actual
                                      > > > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it
                                      > > this way or
                                      > > > > am I being
                                      > > > > > hyper-anal about this?
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                      > > > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                                      > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                                      > > > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                                      > > > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the
                                      > > request, which
                                      > > > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on
                                      > > the request.
                                      > > > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                                      > > > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the
                                      > > schema (WSDL) to
                                      > > > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is
                                      > > represented as
                                      > > > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements.
                                      > Every simple
                                      > > > > value
                                      > > > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                      > > > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is
                                      > > listed therein
                                      > > > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the
                                      > server then,
                                      > > > > right?
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is
                                      > > matters, but was
                                      > > > > that
                                      > > > > > > > the intent?
                                      > > > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the
                                      > > sub elements
                                      > > > > are
                                      > > > > > > in a null namespace.
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                      > > > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                                      > > > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                                      > > > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                      > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                      > > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                      > > > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                      > > > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                      > > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema"
                                      > xmlns:xsi="-
                                      > > > > > > instance">
                                      > > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                      > > > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                      > > > > > > > <inputInteger
                                      > > > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                      > > > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                      > > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                      > > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > > ************Response************
                                      > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                      > > > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                                      > > > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                      > > > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                      > > > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                      > > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                      > > > > > > > <soap:Body
                                      > > > > > > >
                                      > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                      > > > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                      > > > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                      > > > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                      > > > > > > > </soap:Body>
                                      > > > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                      > > > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                                      > > > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                                      > > > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                                      > > > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                                      > > > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > --------------------------------------------------------------
                                      > > > > > > -------_->
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      > > > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                      >
                                      >



                                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






                                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                      soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                    • Glen Daniels
                                      +1. On the nose. ... From: Andrew Layman To: Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 12:33 AM Subject: Re:
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Apr 3, 2001
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        +1. On the nose.

                                        ----- Original Message -----
                                        From: "Andrew Layman" <yahoo@...>
                                        To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                        Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 12:33 AM
                                        Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                                        > We need to distinguish two things. If the content of the xsi:type attribute
                                        > is not a valid qname, for example if the prefix is not in-scope bound to a
                                        > URI declared in a namespace declaration, then it is invalid by ordinary XML
                                        > namespace and schema rules. But whether two types are known by the server
                                        > to have a certain relation is up to the server to determine, subject of
                                        > course to whatever rules it publishes about how it will process messages.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > ----- Original Message -----
                                        > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                        > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:13 PM
                                        > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > fatal error
                                        > [Definition: An error which a conforming XML processor must detect and
                                        > report to the application. After encountering a fatal error, the processor
                                        > may continue processing the data to search for further errors and may report
                                        > such errors to the application. In order to support correction of errors,
                                        > the processor may make unprocessed data from the document (with intermingled
                                        > character data and markup) available to the application. Once a fatal error
                                        > is detected, however, the processor must not continue normal processing
                                        > (i.e., it must not continue to pass character data and information about the
                                        > document's logical structure to the application in the normal way).]
                                        >
                                        > >From this I see no middle ground. That said, implementation specific
                                        > issues
                                        > will exist, but XML and SOAP v1.1 issues should not. Therefore, in the case
                                        > mentioned as example, the value of the xsi:type should not be "guessed" due
                                        > to improper XML, it should be faulted.
                                        >
                                        > Is that a fair assessment?
                                        >
                                        > -Matt Long (Southern drawl accepted)
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > > -----Original Message-----
                                        > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                        > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:56 PM
                                        > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > By the way, XML has a principle called "Draconian Error
                                        > > Handling" that is
                                        > > more restrictive than the very generous "be liberal in what
                                        > > you accept"
                                        > > philosophy exemplified by most HTML browsers. The XML rule
                                        > > is that readers
                                        > > should not try to work around most errors, but should instead
                                        > > simply reject
                                        > > the XML. The purpose of this is to avoid the establishment of subtle,
                                        > > possibly undocumented and unofficial behaviors and accompanying very
                                        > > complicated code that come to be part of an ambiguous yet
                                        > > semi-de-facto
                                        > > standard, much as Netscape's and later other's peculiarities
                                        > > in the handling
                                        > > of weird XML became.
                                        > >
                                        > > More precisely, there is a class of errors called "fatal errors" and
                                        > > conforming processors must handle these as described in the XML 1.0
                                        > > specification, terminology section,
                                        > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-terminology.
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > ----- Original Message -----
                                        > > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                        > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:37 PM
                                        > > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > But what if...it *is* typed incorrectly and the server resolves it to
                                        > > something it's not?
                                        > > ..quagmire?
                                        > >
                                        > > Glen, I do see your point and I really would like to get some
                                        > > resolution to
                                        > > it as I'm loosing both sleep and hair ;-) over it.
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > > -----Original Message-----
                                        > > > From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@...]
                                        > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:35 PM
                                        > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Hm - I think "not necessarily" may be the answer for this part.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > I think it may be fine to have a concept of "out of band type
                                        > > > equivalence"
                                        > > > between any two schema types (primitives or otherwise). If
                                        > > > your WSDL specifies
                                        > > > an "xsd:int" where xsd maps to the 1999 schema URI, and I
                                        > > > send you "data:int"
                                        > > > where data maps to the 2001 schema URI, why shouldn't my
                                        > > > server be able to deal
                                        > > > with that as long as I've got the deserialization
                                        > > > infrastructure to cope? If I
                                        > > > understand that the types are mappable/equivalent, I should
                                        > > > be able to do my
                                        > > > best to deal with the request.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Another example of this would be type specializations. You
                                        > > specify a
                                        > > > "foo:type1" as an argument type, and later on (and out of
                                        > > > band to the WSDL) I
                                        > > > define a schema which makes "foo:type2" a subtype of
                                        > > > "foo:type1". If my server
                                        > > > can deal, I should be able to accept a foo:type2 for the
                                        > > argument, no?
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --Glen
                                        > > >
                                        > > > ----- Original Message -----
                                        > > > From: "Matt Long" <mlong@...>
                                        > > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 11:25 PM
                                        > > > Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes
                                        > > > without saying that
                                        > > > > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the
                                        > > > request,i.e.,
                                        > > > > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the
                                        > > > resolution of the
                                        > > > > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is
                                        > > > WSDL aware.
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                        > > > > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                        > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                                        > > > > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                                        > > > > > declaration, even if
                                        > > > > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
                                        > > > > > From: <keithba@...>
                                        > > > > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                                        > > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There
                                        > > > are times
                                        > > > > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                                        > > > > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                                        > > > > > implementation
                                        > > > > > > up.
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                                        > > > > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server
                                        > > > would have to do
                                        > > > > > the
                                        > > > > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                                        > > > > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                                        > > > > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in
                                        > > the request
                                        > > > > > which must
                                        > > > > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL.
                                        > > > Currently, my app
                                        > > > > > would
                                        > > > > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                                        > > > > > of "xsi:type"
                                        > > > > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I
                                        > > > think the actual
                                        > > > > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it
                                        > > > this way or
                                        > > > > > am I being
                                        > > > > > > hyper-anal about this?
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                        > > > > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                                        > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                                        > > > > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                                        > > > > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the
                                        > > > request, which
                                        > > > > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on
                                        > > > the request.
                                        > > > > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                                        > > > > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the
                                        > > > schema (WSDL) to
                                        > > > > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is
                                        > > > represented as
                                        > > > > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements.
                                        > > Every simple
                                        > > > > > value
                                        > > > > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                        > > > > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is
                                        > > > listed therein
                                        > > > > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the
                                        > > server then,
                                        > > > > > right?
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is
                                        > > > matters, but was
                                        > > > > > that
                                        > > > > > > > > the intent?
                                        > > > > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the
                                        > > > sub elements
                                        > > > > > are
                                        > > > > > > > in a null namespace.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                        > > > > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                                        > > > > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                                        > > > > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                        > > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                        > > > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                        > > > > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                        > > > > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                        > > > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema"
                                        > > xmlns:xsi="-
                                        > > > > > > > instance">
                                        > > > > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                        > > > > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                        > > > > > > > > <inputInteger
                                        > > > > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                        > > > > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                        > > > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                        > > > > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > > ************Response************
                                        > > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                        > > > > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                                        > > > > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                        > > > > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                        > > > > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                        > > > > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                        > > > > > > > > <soap:Body
                                        > > > > > > > >
                                        > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                        > > > > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                        > > > > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                        > > > > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                        > > > > > > > > </soap:Body>
                                        > > > > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                        > > > > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                                        > > > > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                                        > > > > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                                        > > > > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                                        > > > > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                                        > > > > > > > -------_->
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > > > > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > >
                                        > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                        > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > >
                                        > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                        > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > >
                                        > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                        > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        >
                                        >
                                      • Andrew Layman
                                        If the type of an element is described by a schema, and the receiver of a message has advertised that he processes messages according to that schema, then the
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Apr 4, 2001
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          If the type of an element is described by a schema, and the receiver of a
                                          message has advertised that he processes messages according to that schema,
                                          then the sender of a message has some latitude but not unlimited latitude.
                                          Similarly, the receiver of the message has some but not unlimited latitude
                                          in his processing.

                                          The sender can choose different prefixes to represent namespaces, but the
                                          namespaces he uses, as identified by their URIs, must be consistent with the
                                          namespaces advertised by the receiver's schema. The types of elements may
                                          be made more specific by means of an xsi:type attribute, but they may not be
                                          made less specific or arbitrarily different.

                                          The receiver may be able to successfully process a message by means of
                                          information that was not advertised, but he would be wrong to do less than
                                          what he advertises.

                                          ----- Original Message -----
                                          From: "Bob Cunnings" <cunnings@...>
                                          To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                          Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 9:15 AM
                                          Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                                          Hello,

                                          Not so fast! Since it is perfectly allowable for the server to
                                          "reference an external schema", why can't it ignore any explicit
                                          type attributes, as if they weren't there? If the client is sending
                                          something that the server isn't expecting, there will be problems
                                          either way...

                                          RC

                                          > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying
                                          that
                                          > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e.,
                                          > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the resolution of
                                          the
                                          > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is WSDL aware.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > > -----Original Message-----
                                          > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                          > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                                          > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                          > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                                          > > declaration, even if
                                          > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > ----- Original Message -----
                                          > > From: <keithba@...>
                                          > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                          > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                                          > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                                          > >
                                          > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                                          > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                                          > >
                                          > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                                          > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                                          > > implementation
                                          > > > up.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                          > > >
                                          > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                                          > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                                          > > the
                                          > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                                          > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                                          > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                                          > > which must
                                          > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                                          > > would
                                          > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                                          > > of "xsi:type"
                                          > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                                          > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                                          > > am I being
                                          > > > hyper-anal about this?
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                          > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                                          > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                                          > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                                          > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                                          > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                                          > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                                          > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                                          > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                                          > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                                          > > value
                                          > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                          > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                                          > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                                          > > right?
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                                          > > that
                                          > > > > > the intent?
                                          > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                                          > > are
                                          > > > > in a null namespace.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                          > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                                          > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                                          > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                          > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                          > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                          > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                          > > > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                          > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                          > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                                          > > > > instance">
                                          > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                          > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                          > > > > > <inputInteger
                                          > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                          > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                          > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                          > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > >
                                          > > > > > ************Response************
                                          > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                          > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                                          > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                          > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                          > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                          > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                          > > > > > <soap:Body
                                          > > > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                          > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                          > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                          > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                          > > > > > </soap:Body>
                                          > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                          > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                                          > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                                          > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                                          > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                                          > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                                          > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                                          > > > > -------_->
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                          > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                          > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          >




                                          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        • Bob Cunnings
                                          Hello, Not so fast! Since it is perfectly allowable for the server to reference an external schema , why can t it ignore any explicit type attributes, as if
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Apr 4, 2001
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Hello,

                                            Not so fast! Since it is perfectly allowable for the server to
                                            "reference an external schema", why can't it ignore any explicit
                                            type attributes, as if they weren't there? If the client is sending
                                            something that the server isn't expecting, there will be problems
                                            either way...

                                            RC

                                            > ok, that's what I thought. Now, I would assume it goes without saying that
                                            > the WSDL resolution must be exact to the resolution in the request,i.e.,
                                            > "s"'s resolved uri in the request must be identical to the resolution of the
                                            > typed part in WSDL with the caveat that the SOAP server is WSDL aware.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > > -----Original Message-----
                                            > > From: Andrew Layman [mailto:yahoo@...]
                                            > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:14 PM
                                            > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
                                            > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > "s" must resolve in the instance to a valid namespace
                                            > > declaration, even if
                                            > > the WSDL file also declares a prefix bound to a namespace URI.
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > ----- Original Message -----
                                            > > From: <keithba@...>
                                            > > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                            > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:04 PM
                                            > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > 1) Please put your implementation up!
                                            > >
                                            > > 2) I'm not sure what the right thing to do here is. There are times
                                            > > to be strict, and times to be lax. Currently, we are lax here.
                                            > >
                                            > > 3) Please put your implementation up!
                                            > >
                                            > > --- In soapbuilders@y..., "Matt Long" <mlong@P...> wrote:
                                            > > > This is the kind of quagmire that keeps me from putting my
                                            > > implementation
                                            > > > up.
                                            > > >
                                            > > > <inputInteger xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                            > > >
                                            > > > It would seem to me that if WSDL resolves the "s" to
                                            > > > "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" that the server would have to do
                                            > > the
                                            > > > same, with the caveat(s) that prefix of the type
                                            > > ("s","xsd","whatever") is
                                            > > > namespaced to "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" in the request
                                            > > which must
                                            > > > be checked to exactly resolve to that of WSDL. Currently, my app
                                            > > would
                                            > > > check everything against WSDL, but not perform this resolution
                                            > > of "xsi:type"
                                            > > > (it only looks for a qname match, e.g., no good) I think the actual
                                            > > > resolution would be required. Aaaaarg! Do you see it this way or
                                            > > am I being
                                            > > > hyper-anal about this?
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > > -----Original Message-----
                                            > > > > From: keithba@m... [mailto:keithba@m...]
                                            > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 9:38 PM
                                            > > > > To: soapbuilders@y...
                                            > > > > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                                            > > > > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                                            > > > > > Shouldn't it?
                                            > > > > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                                            > > > > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                                            > > > > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                                            > > value
                                            > > > > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                            > > > > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                                            > > > > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                                            > > right?
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                                            > > that
                                            > > > > > the intent?
                                            > > > > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements
                                            > > are
                                            > > > > in a null namespace.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                            > > > > > namespace "s:int"?
                                            > > > > Good question. I don't know.
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > ********REQUEST************
                                            > > > > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                            > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                            > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                            > > > > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                            > > > > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                            > > > > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                            > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                                            > > > > instance">
                                            > > > > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                            > > > > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                            > > > > > <inputInteger
                                            > > > > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                            > > > > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                            > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                            > > > > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > >
                                            > > > > > ************Response************
                                            > > > > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                            > > > > > <soap:Envelope
                                            > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                            > > > > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                            > > > > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                            > > > > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                            > > > > > <soap:Body
                                            > > > > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                            > > > > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                            > > > > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                            > > > > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                            > > > > > </soap:Body>
                                            > > > > > </soap:Envelope>
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                            > > > > ---------------------~-~>
                                            > > > > Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption!
                                            > > > > Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide,
                                            > > > > "Securing Your Web site for Business." Get it now!
                                            > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/KVNB7A/e.WCAA/bT0EAA/WNqXlB/TM
                                            > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
                                            > > > > -------_->
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                            > > > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@y...
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                            > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                            > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                            > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                            > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                            >
                                          • Paul Kulchenko
                                            Hi, Andrew! Could someone post a short summary of this discussion, because I m not an expert and I cannot keep up with it, maybe someone could explain what
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Apr 4, 2001
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Hi, Andrew!

                                              Could someone post a short summary of this discussion, because I'm
                                              not an expert and I cannot keep up with it, maybe someone could
                                              explain what implementation should do with resolving prefixes on
                                              values of xsi:type? Thank you.

                                              Best wishes, Paul.

                                              --- Andrew Layman <yahoo@...> wrote:
                                              > I'd need to check, and this is a subtle issue so I've copied
                                              > another expert,
                                              > Allen Brown, but it is probably a validation error to have an
                                              > xsi:type
                                              > attribute with an invalid value. The subtlety is that validation is
                                              > up to
                                              > the server, but I wonder whether it is valid for a server to
                                              > advertise
                                              > itself as a SOAP server and yet use a schema that is less specific
                                              > than the
                                              > SOAP schema. In any case, even if not mandated by the
                                              > specification, it
                                              > certainly seems odd and poor diagnostics to ignore the attribute.
                                              >
                                              > Regarding the comment that "subelements are in a null namespace,"
                                              > this is
                                              > not technically accurate. There is no concept of a "null
                                              > namespace." What
                                              > is true is that SOAP section 5 says that accessors are represented
                                              > by
                                              > unqualified elements. Your XML usage is correct; I'm just being
                                              > picky about
                                              > the phrasing. :-)
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > ----- Original Message -----
                                              > From: <keithba@...>
                                              > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                              > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:38 PM
                                              > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                                              > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                                              > > Shouldn't it?
                                              > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                                              > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                                              > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                                              > value
                                              > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                              > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                                              > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                                              > right?
                                              >
                                              > >
                                              > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                                              > that
                                              > > the intent?
                                              > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements are
                                              > in a null namespace.
                                              >
                                              > >
                                              > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                              > > namespace "s:int"?
                                              > Good question. I don't know.
                                              >
                                              > >
                                              > > ********REQUEST************
                                              > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                              > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                              > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                              > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                              > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                              > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                              > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                                              > instance">
                                              > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                              > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                              > > <inputInteger
                                              > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                              > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                              > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                              > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > ************Response************
                                              > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                              > > <soap:Envelope
                                              > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                              > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                              > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                              > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                              > > <soap:Body
                                              > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                              > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                              > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                              > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                              > > </soap:Body>
                                              > > </soap:Envelope>
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                              > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                              >
                                              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                              > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                              >
                                              >


                                              __________________________________________________
                                              Do You Yahoo!?
                                              Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
                                              http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
                                            • Andrew Layman
                                              Maybe Allen can give a longer explanation. The brief version is that, within a qname datatype or the soap-enc:array attribute s type, prefixes represent
                                              Message 22 of 22 , Apr 5, 2001
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Maybe Allen can give a longer explanation. The brief version is that,
                                                within a qname datatype or the soap-enc:array attribute's type, prefixes
                                                represent namespace URIs in the same way, with the same scoping rules etc.
                                                as they do on element or attribute names.


                                                ----- Original Message -----
                                                From: "Paul Kulchenko" <paulclinger@...>
                                                To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                                Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@...>
                                                Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 9:23 AM
                                                Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions


                                                Hi, Andrew!

                                                Could someone post a short summary of this discussion, because I'm
                                                not an expert and I cannot keep up with it, maybe someone could
                                                explain what implementation should do with resolving prefixes on
                                                values of xsi:type? Thank you.

                                                Best wishes, Paul.

                                                --- Andrew Layman <yahoo@...> wrote:
                                                > I'd need to check, and this is a subtle issue so I've copied
                                                > another expert,
                                                > Allen Brown, but it is probably a validation error to have an
                                                > xsi:type
                                                > attribute with an invalid value. The subtlety is that validation is
                                                > up to
                                                > the server, but I wonder whether it is valid for a server to
                                                > advertise
                                                > itself as a SOAP server and yet use a schema that is less specific
                                                > than the
                                                > SOAP schema. In any case, even if not mandated by the
                                                > specification, it
                                                > certainly seems odd and poor diagnostics to ignore the attribute.
                                                >
                                                > Regarding the comment that "subelements are in a null namespace,"
                                                > this is
                                                > not technically accurate. There is no concept of a "null
                                                > namespace." What
                                                > is true is that SOAP section 5 says that accessors are represented
                                                > by
                                                > unqualified elements. Your XML usage is correct; I'm just being
                                                > picky about
                                                > the phrasing. :-)
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > ----- Original Message -----
                                                > From: <keithba@...>
                                                > To: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
                                                > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:38 PM
                                                > Subject: [soapbuilders] Re: DOT NET Dump +Questions
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > > 1) I sent an unresolved namespace "s:int" in the request, which
                                                > > correctly resolves in the local WSDL, but not on the request.
                                                > > Shouldn't it?
                                                > We don't use this field at all, and only use the schema (WSDL) to
                                                > determine type. From the spec: "A simple value is represented as
                                                > character data, that is, without any subelements. Every simple
                                                > value
                                                > must have a type that is either listed in the XML Schemas
                                                > Specification, part 2 [11] or whose source type is listed therein
                                                > (see also section 5.2). " I think it's up to the server then,
                                                > right?
                                                >
                                                > >
                                                > > 2) The response has an xmlns="" , not that is matters, but was
                                                > that
                                                > > the intent?
                                                > Yes. Section 5, for some reason, mandates that the sub elements are
                                                > in a null namespace.
                                                >
                                                > >
                                                > > 3) Should not this request fault due to the unresolve
                                                > > namespace "s:int"?
                                                > Good question. I don't know.
                                                >
                                                > >
                                                > > ********REQUEST************
                                                > > ?oClient.requestXML.xml
                                                > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                                > > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-
                                                > > ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" SOAP-
                                                > > ENV:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                                > > xmlns:SOAP-ENC="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                                > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="-
                                                > instance">
                                                > > <SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                                > > <ns:echoInteger xmlns:ns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                                > > <inputInteger
                                                > > xsi:type="s:int">3</inputInteger>
                                                > > </ns:echoInteger>
                                                > > </SOAP-ENV:Body>
                                                > > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > > ************Response************
                                                > > <?xml version="1.0"?>
                                                > > <soap:Envelope
                                                > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
                                                > > xmlns:soapenc="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"
                                                > > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
                                                > > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
                                                > > <soap:Body
                                                > > soap:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/">
                                                > > <echoIntegerResponse xmlns="http://soapinterop.org/">
                                                > > <Return xmlns="">3</Return>
                                                > > </echoIntegerResponse>
                                                > > </soap:Body>
                                                > > </soap:Envelope>
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                                > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                                > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                                >
                                                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                                > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                                > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                                >
                                                >


                                                __________________________________________________
                                                Do You Yahoo!?
                                                Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
                                                http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/


                                                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                                soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.