For review: draft-baker-soap-media-reg-05

[Mark Nottingham]

Hi Chris.

For interoperability. In particular, if any version of XML is allowed, 
it's possible to have a message that contains characters that are 
impossible to re-serialize into a lower version of XML; as a result, 
intermediaries in particular, may be in a difficult situation.

We expect that other versions of XML would be accommodated by other 
media types; there is nothing in SOAP itself that constrains the 
version of XML.

The related errata issues (rec20[1] and rec22[2]) against SOAP 1.2 were 
resolved last week, but unfortunately the result isn't reflected in 
their summaries, and the meeting minutes are not yet available. This 
information should be available very soon.

Regards,

1. http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-rec-issues.html#x20
2. http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-rec-issues.html#x22


On Apr 30, 2004, at 3:28 PM, Chris Lilley wrote:

> On Saturday, May 1, 2004, 12:09:31 AM, Mark wrote:
>
> MN> The only substantive change in this draft is the restriction of the
> MN> content to XML 1.0 (i.e., XML 1.1 SOAP envelopes cannot be 
> identified
> MN> by this media type).
>
> MN> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-baker-soap-media-reg-05.txt
>
> What motivates this change? Why exclude XML 1.1?
>
> -- 
>  Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris at w3.org
>  Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
>  Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
>
>

--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems