- From: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:26:26 +0000 (GMT)
- To: public-soap-jms@w3.org
ISSUE-1 (Assert Protocol-2013 is spurious): Assertion Protocol-2013 is missing RFC 2119 language [SOAP-JMS Binding specification] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/1 Raised by: Eric Johnson On product: SOAP-JMS Binding specification Description: ------------ We have this paragraph: "if the charset parameter is specified it is checked to ensure that it matches the encoding value from the supplied XML. If there is a mismatch then a fault MUST be generated.† [Definition: Use fault subcode contentTypeMismatch in the event that the values do not match.†] Protocol-2012 captures the first sentence, and Protocol-2013 covers the [Definition:]. Notice that the definition doesn't have any RFC 2119 language. Justification: -------------- It is impossible to test Protocol-2013 without also testing 2012. Further, Protocol-2013 does not contain any RFC 2119 language. Yet it is clearly subsidiary to Protocol-2012, and the absence of this language leaves it unclear as to what MUST be done. Combining the two statements will clarify the possible confusion. Proposal: --------- Change the paragraph that reads: "if the charset parameter is specified it is checked to ensure that it matches the encoding value from the supplied XML. If there is a mismatch then a fault MUST be generated.† [Definition: Use fault subcode contentTypeMismatch in the event that the values do not match.†] to this: "If the charset parameter is specified it is checked to ensure that it matches the encoding value from the supplied XML. A fault MUST be generated with [Definition: subcode *contentTypeMismatch* if the encoding values do not match.]†"
Received on Monday, 27 July 2009 20:26:41 UTC