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

SOAP schema bugs?

Expand Messages
  • Rich Salz
    The schema definitions for both SOAP 1.1 and 1.2 seem to have a problem. The definition of the Envelope item has this:
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 30, 2002
      The schema definitions for both SOAP 1.1 and 1.2 seem to have a problem.
      The definition of the Envelope item has this:
      <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="lax" />
      Since, for exmaple, the SOAP encodingStyle attribute is allowed on the
      Envelope element (as in Example 1 of the SOAP 1.1 spec), shouldn't
      ##other really be ##any ?
      /r$
    • simonfell99
      ... problem. ... the ... for SOAP 1.1 its wrong [i flagged this at the start of the year], I ended up shipping my own modified version of the schema. In SOAP
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 30, 2002
        --- In soapbuilders@y..., Rich Salz <r.salz@v...> wrote:
        > The schema definitions for both SOAP 1.1 and 1.2 seem to have a
        problem.
        > The definition of the Envelope item has this:
        > <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="lax" />
        > Since, for exmaple, the SOAP encodingStyle attribute is allowed on
        the
        > Envelope element (as in Example 1 of the SOAP 1.1 spec), shouldn't
        > ##other really be ##any ?
        > /r$

        for SOAP 1.1 its wrong [i flagged this at the start of the year], I
        ended up shipping my own modified version of the schema. In SOAP 1.2
        the rules about where encodingStyle can appear have been tightened
        down, and it can no longer appear on the envelope element.

        Cheers
        Simon
        www.pocketsoap.com
      • Rich Salz
        Argh, you re right, I misread the text of bullets #2 and #3 in Sec 5.1.1, for 1.2. (Whoever decided to define a protocol in abstract information terms should
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 30, 2002
          Argh, you're right, I misread the text of bullets #2 and #3 in Sec
          5.1.1, for 1.2. (Whoever decided to define a protocol in abstract
          information terms should be shot. :)

          I guess for 1.1 we'll distribute our own schema, too.

          thanks.
          /r$
        • Martin Gudgin
          Rich, Simon, WE just updated the SOAP envelope schema, but unfortunately I d not noticed/had forgotten about this problem, too much time working on 1.2 is my
          Message 4 of 5 , Sep 1 2:11 PM
            Rich, Simon,

            WE just updated the SOAP envelope schema, but unfortunately I'd not
            noticed/had forgotten about this problem, too much time working on 1.2 is my
            excuse!

            I will work to get the 1.1 schema updated to ##any

            Any other change requests?

            BTW - please send such requests to mgudgin@... ( not the address I
            use for this list )

            Cheers

            Gudge

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Rich Salz" <r.salz@...>
            To: "simonfell99" <ws@...>
            Cc: <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 6:13 PM
            Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] Re: SOAP schema bugs?


            > Argh, you're right, I misread the text of bullets #2 and #3 in Sec
            > 5.1.1, for 1.2. (Whoever decided to define a protocol in abstract
            > information terms should be shot. :)
            >
            > I guess for 1.1 we'll distribute our own schema, too.
            >
            > thanks.
            > /r$
            >
            >
            >
            > -----------------------------------------------------------------
            > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
            implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
            >
            > 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/
            >
            >
            >
          • Marc Hadley
            The LC WD contains the following text in [1]. The encodingStyle attribute information item MAY only appear on: 1. A SOAP header block (see 5.2.1 SOAP header
            Message 5 of 5 , Sep 3 6:57 AM
              The LC WD contains the following text in [1].

              "The encodingStyle attribute information item MAY only appear on:

              1. A SOAP header block (see 5.2.1 SOAP header block).

              2. A child element information item of the SOAP Body element
              information item (see 5.3.1 SOAP Body child Element).

              3. A child element information item of the SOAP Detail element
              information item (see 5.4.5.1 SOAP detail entry).

              4. Any descendent of 1, 2, and 3 above."

              Therefore I think the schema for the 1.2 Envelope EII is correct.

              Regards,
              Marc.

              [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-soap12-part1-20020626/#soapencattr

              On Friday, Aug 30, 2002, at 12:38 US/Eastern, Rich Salz wrote:

              >
              > The schema definitions for both SOAP 1.1 and 1.2 seem to have a
              > problem. The definition of the Envelope item has this:
              > <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="lax" />
              > Since, for exmaple, the SOAP encodingStyle attribute is allowed on the
              > Envelope element (as in Example 1 of the SOAP 1.1 spec), shouldn't
              > ##other really be ##any ?
              > /r$
              >
              >
              --
              Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@...>
              XML Technology Center, Sun Microsystems.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.