SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts

--> %entities; ]>

&w3c-designation-part2;

&status;

&draft.day; &draft.month; &draft.year; &dated-part2; http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-20010709/ http://www.w3.org/TR/&shortname-part2;/ Martin Gudgin DevelopMentor Marc Hadley Sun Microsystems Jean-Jacques Moreau Canon Henrik Frystyk Nielsen Microsoft

SOAP Version 1.2 is a lightweight protocol intended for exchanging structured information in a decentralized, distributed environment. SOAP Version 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts defines a set of adjuncts that may be used with SOAP Version 1.2 Part1: Messaging Framework. This specification depends on SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework .

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. The latest status of this document series is maintained at the W3C.

This is the fourth W3C Working Draft of the SOAP Version 1.2 specification for review by W3C members and other interested parties. It has been produced by the XML Protocol Working Group (WG), which is part of the XML Protocol Activity.

Refer to appendix for a detailed list of changes since the last publication of this document. A list of open issues against this document can be found at http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.

Comments on this document should be sent to xmlp-comments@w3.org (public archive ). It is inappropriate to send discussion email to this address.

Discussion of this document takes place on the public xml-dist-app@w3.org mailing list under the email communication rules in the XML Protocol Working Group Charter .

This is a public W3C Working Draft. It is a draft document and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use W3C Working Drafts as reference material or to cite them as other than "work in progress". A list of all W3C technical reports can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/.

English

Last Modified: $Date: 2002/06/13 04:08:58 $ CET

Introduction

SOAP Version 1.2 (SOAP) is a lightweight protocol intended for exchange of structured information between peers in a decentralized, distributed environment. The SOAP specification consists of three parts. Part 2 (this document) defines a set of adjuncts that MAY be used with the SOAP messaging framework:

The SOAP Data Model represents application-defined data structures and values as a directed, edge-labeled graph of nodes (see ).

The SOAP Encoding defines a set of rules for encoding instances of data that conform to the SOAP Data Model for inclusion in SOAP messages (see ).

The SOAP RPC Representation defines a convention for how to use the SOAP Data Model for representing RPC calls and responses (see ).

A convention for describing features and bindings (see ).

A request response message exchange pattern definition and a message exchange pattern supporting non-SOAP requests for SOAP responses, (see ).

A feature for control of methods used on the World Wide Web (see ).

The SOAP HTTP Binding defines a binding of SOAP to HTTP following the rules of the SOAP Protocol Binding Framework (see ).

Part 0 is a non-normative document intended to provide an easily understandable tutorial on the features of the SOAP Version 1.2 specifications.

Part 1 defines the SOAP messaging framework.

In previous versions of this specification the SOAP name was an acronym. This is no longer the case.

Notational Conventions

The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 .

This specification uses a number of namespace prefixes throughout; they are listed in . Note that the choice of any namespace prefix is arbitrary and not semantically significant (see ).

Prefixes and Namespaces used in this specification
Prefix	Namespace	Notes
env	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope	Defined by Part 1 .
enc	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding	A normative XML Schema , document for the http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding namespace can be found at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap- encoding.
xs	http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema	Defined in the W3C XML Schema specification , .
xsi	http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance	Defined in the W3C XML Schema specification , .
context	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/bindingFramework/ExchangeContext/	See .
mep	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/	See .
fail	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/FailureReasons/	See .
reqres	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/	See .
webmeth	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/features/web-method/	See .

Namespace names of the general form http://example.org/... and http://example.com/... represent application or context-dependent URIs .

This specification uses the Extended Backus-Naur Form (EBNF) as described in .

With the exception of examples and sections explicitly marked as "Non-Normative", all parts of this specification are normative.

SOAP Data Model

The SOAP Data Model represents application-defined data structures and values as a directed edge-labeled graph of nodes. Components of this graph are described in the following sections.

The purpose of the SOAP Data Model is to provide a mapping of non-XML based data to some wire representation. It is important to note that use of the SOAP Data Model, the accompanying SOAP Encoding (see ), and/or the SOAP RPC Representation (see ) is OPTIONAL. Applications which already model data in XML, for example using W3C XML Schema ,, may not need to use the SOAP Data Model. Due to their optionality, it is NOT a requirement to implement the SOAP Data Model, the SOAP Encoding and/or the SOAP RPC Representation as part of a SOAP node.

Graph Edges

Edges in the graph are said to originate at a graph node and terminate at a graph node. An edge that originates at a graph node is known as an outbound edge with respect to that graph node. An edge that terminates at a graph node is known as an inbound edge with respect to that graph node. An edge MAY originate and terminate at the same graph node.

The outbound edges of a given graph node MAY be distinguished by label or by position, or both. Position is a total order on such edges; thus any outbound edge MAY be identified by position.

Edge labels

An edge label is an XML Schema Qualified Name (see XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes ). Two edge labels are equal if and only if both of the following are true:

Their local name values are the same.

Either of the following is true:

Their namespace name values are missing.

Their namespace name values are present and the same.

See for uses of edge labels and position to distinguish the members of encoded values, and XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes for more information about comparing XML qualified names.

Graph Nodes

A graph node is either a terminal graph node or a non-terminal graph node. A non-terminal graph node has one or more outbound edges. A terminal graph node has no outbound edges and an optional lexical value. Both types of graph node have an optional unique identifier of type ID in the namespace named "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema", (see XML Schema Part2: DataTypes ) and an optional type name of type QName in the namespace named "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" (see XML Schema Part2: DataTypes ).

Single and Multi reference nodes

A graph node may be single reference or multi reference. A single reference graph node has a single inbound edge. A multi reference graph node has multiple inbound edges.

Values

A simple value is represented as a terminal graph node.

A compound value is represented as a non-terminal graph node as follows:

If the labels of a non-terminal graph node's outbound edges are not unique (i.e. they can be duplicated), the non-terminal graph node is known as a "generic". Outbound edges of a generic MAY be distinguished by label and/or position, according to the needs of the application.

A non-terminal graph node whose outbound edges are distinguished solely by their labels is known as a "struct". The outbound edges of a struct MUST be labeled with distinct names (see ).

A non-terminal graph node whose outbound edges are distinguished solely by position is known as an "array". The outbound edges of an array MUST NOT be labelled.

The Working Group solicits feedback from implementors during the Last Call period whether the section on 'generics' should remain in this document or whether it should be removed altogether. The Working Group does not request input on improved designs or otherwise, just whether the section is useful asis or not as part of this document. SOAP Encoding

SOAP Encoding describes how to encode instances of data that conform to the data model described in . This encoding MAY be used to transmit data in SOAP header blocks and/or SOAP bodies. Other data models, alternate encodings of the SOAP Data Model as well as unencoded data MAY also be used in SOAP messages (see SOAP encodingStyle Attribute for specification of alternative encoding styles and see for restrictions on data models and encodings used to represent SOAP Remote Procedure Calls).

The serialization rules defined in this section are identified by the URI http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding. SOAP messages using this particular serialization SHOULD indicate that fact by using the SOAP encodingStyle attribute information item (see SOAP encodingStyle Attribute).

Rules for Encoding Graphs in XML

XML allows very flexible encoding of data. SOAP Encoding defines a narrower set of rules for encoding the graphs described in . This section defines the encoding at a high level, and the subsequent sub-sections describe the encoding rules in more detail. The encodings described in this section can be used in conjunction with the mapping of RPC calls and responses specified in .

The encodings are described below from the perspective of a de-serializer. In each case, the presence of an XML serialization is presumed, and the mapping to a corresponding graph is described.

More than one encoding is typically possible for a given graph. When serializing a graph for transmission inside a SOAP message any representation that deserializes to the identical graph MAY be used; when receiving an encoded SOAP message, all representations MUST be accepted.

Encoding graph edges and nodes

Each graph edge is encoded as an element information item and each element information item represents a graph edge. describes the relationship between edge labels and the local name and namespace name properties of such element information items.

The graph node at which an edge terminates is determined by examination of the serialized XML as follows:

If the element information item representing the edge does not have a ref attribute information item (see ) among its attributes then that element information item is said to represent a node in the graph and the edge terminates at that node.

If the element information item representing the edge does have a ref attribute information item (see ) among its attributes, then the value of that attribute information item MUST be identical to the value of exactly one id attribute information item ( see ) in the same envelope. In this case the edge terminates at the graph node represented by the element information item on which the id attribute information item appears. That element information item MUST be in the scope of an encodingStyle attribute with a value of http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding.

All nodes in the graph are encoded as described in 1 above. Additional inbound edges for multi reference graph nodes are encoded as described in 2 above.

Encoding simple values

The lexical value of a terminal graph node (simple value) is the sequence of Unicode characters identified by the character information item children of the element information item representing that node.

Encoding compound values

An outbound edge of a graph node is encoded as an element information item child of the element information item that represents the node (see ). Particular rules apply depending on what kind of compound value the graph node represents. These rules are as follows:

For a graph edge which is distinguished by label ("struct" or "generic"), the namespace name and local name properties of the element information item together determine the value of the edge label.

For a graph edge which is distinguished by position ("array" or "generic"):

The ordinal position of the graph edge corresponds to the position of the element information item relative to its siblings

If outbound edges are distinguished only by position ("array") then the local name and namespace name properties of the element information item are not significant.

The following rules apply to the encoding of a graph node that represents an "array":

The element information item representing an array node MAY have among its attributes an itemType attribute information item (see ).

The element information item representing an array node MAY have among its attributes an arraySize attribute information item (see ).

If a graph edge does not terminate in a graph node then it can either be omitted from the serialization or it can be encoded as an element information item with an xsi:nil attribute information item whose value is true.

Computing the Type Name property

The type name property of a graph node is a {namespace name, local name} pair computed as follows:

If the element information item representing the graph node has an xsi:type attribute information item among its attributes then the type name property of the graph node is the value of the xsi:type attribute information item.

This attribute is of type QName in the namespace named "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" (see XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes ); its value consists of the pair {namespace name, local name}. Neither the prefix used to construct the QName nor any information relating to any definition of the type is considered to be part of the value. The SOAP graph carries only the qualified name of the type.

Otherwise if the parent element information item of the element information item representing the graph node has a soap:itemType attribute information item (see ) among its attributes then the type name property of the graph node is the value of the soap:itemType attribute information item

Otherwise the value of the type name property of the graph node is unspecified.

These rules define how the type name property of a graph node in a graph is computed from a serialized encoding. This specification does not mandate validation using any particular schema language or type system. Nor does it include built in types or provide any standardized faults to reflect value/type name conflicts.

However, nothing prohibits development of additional specifications to describe the use of SOAP with particular schema languages or type systems. Such additional specifications MAY mandate validation using particular schema language, and MAY specify faults to be generated if validation fails. Such additional specifications MAY specify augmentations to the deserialized graph based on information determined from such a validation. The use by SOAP of xsi:type is intended to facilitate integration with the W3C XML Schema language (see ). Other XML based schema languages, data schemas and programmatic type systems MAY be used but only to the extent that they are compatible with the serialization described in this specification.

itemType Attribute Information Item

The itemType attribute information item has the following Infoset properties:

A local name of itemType;

A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding.

A specified property with a value of true.

The type of the itemType attribute information item is QName in the namespace named http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema. The value of the itemType attribute information item is used to compute the type name property (see ) of members of an array.

Unique identifiers id Attribute Information Item

The id attribute information item has the following Infoset properties:

A local name of id;

A namespace name which is empty

A specified property with a value of true.

The type of the id attribute information item is ID in the namespace named http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema. The value of the id attribute information item is a unique identifier that can be referred to by a ref attribute information item (see ).

ref Attribute Information Item

The ref attribute information item has the following Infoset properties:

A local name of ref;

A namespace name which is empty

A specified property with a value of true.

The type of the ref attribute information item is IDREF in the namespace named http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema. The value of the ref attribute information item is a reference to a unique identifier defined by an id attribute information item (see ).

Constraints on id and ref attribute information items

The value of a ref attribute information item MUST also be the value of exactly one id attribute information item.

A ref attribute information item and an id attribute information item MUST NOT appear on the same element information item.

arraySize Attribute Information Item

The arraySize attribute information item has the following Infoset properties:

A local name of arraySize;

A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding.

A default value of "*"

The type of the arraySize attribute information item is arraySize in the namespace named http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-encoding.

The value of the arraySize attribute information item MUST conform to the following EBNF grammer

arraySizeValue ("*" | concreteSize) nextConcreteSize* nextConcreteSize " " concreteSize concreteSize [0-9]+

The array's dimensions are represented by each item in the list of sizes (unspecified size in case of the asterisk). The number of items in the list represents the number of dimensions in the array. The asterisk, if present, MUST only appear in the first position in the list.

Decoding Faults

During deserialization a SOAP receiver:

SHOULD generate an env:Sender SOAP fault with a subcode of enc:MissingID if the message violates the constraints on id and ref attribute information items (see ).

MAY generate an env:Sender SOAP fault with a subcode of enc:UntypedValue if the type name property of an encoded graph node is unspecified.

SOAP RPC Representation

One of the design goals of SOAP is to facilitate the exchange of messages that map conveniently to definitions and invocations of method and procedure calls in commonly used programming languages. For that purpose, this section defines a uniform representation of RPC requests and responses. It does not define actual mappings to any particular programming language. The representation is entirely platform independent and considerable effort has been made to encourage usage that is consistent with the Web in general.

As mentioned in section , use and implementation of the SOAP RPC Representation is OPTIONAL.

The SOAP encodingStyle attribute information item (see SOAP encodingStyle Attribute) is used to indicate the encoding style of the RPC representation. The encoding thus specified needs to support "struct" and "array" compound value constructs defined in . The encoding style defined in supports such constructs and is therefore suitable for use with the SOAP RPC Representation.

This SOAP RPC Representation is not predicated on any SOAP protocol binding. When SOAP is bound to HTTP, an RPC invocation maps naturally to an HTTP request and an RPC response maps to an HTTP response. (see ). However, the SOAP RPC Representation is not limited only to the SOAP HTTP Binding.

To invoke an RPC, the following information is needed:

The binding-specific address of the target SOAP node

A procedure or method name

The identities and values of any arguments to be passed to the procedure or method. Arguments used to identify Web resources SHOULD be distinguished from those representing data or control information (see .)

Values for properties as required by any features of the binding to be used. For example, GET or POST for the webmeth:Method property of the .

Optional header data

SOAP RPC relies on the protocol binding to provide a mechanism for carrying the URI of the target SOAP node. For HTTP the request URI indicates the resource against which the invocation is being made. Other than requiring it to be a valid URI, SOAP places no restriction on the form of an identifier (see RFC2396 for more information on URIs). The section further discusses the use of URI's for identifying RPC resources.

The SOAP RPC Representation employs the and . Use of the SOAP RPC Representation with other MEPs MAY be possible, but is beyond the scope of this specification.

Use of RPC on the World Wide Web

The following guidelines SHOULD be followed when deploying SOAP RPC applications on the World Wide Web:

Identification of RPC Resources

The World Wide Web identifies resources with URIs, but common programming conventions convey identification information in the arguments to procedures, or in the names of those procedures. For example, the call: "updateQuantityInStock(PartNumber="123", NewQuantity="200") suggests that the resource to be updated is the QuantityInStock for PartNumber "123". Accordingly, when mapping to or from a programming language method or procedure call, any arguments that serve to identify resources (such as the part number above) should when practical be represented in the URI to which the SOAP message is addressed. When mapping to or from a programming language method or procedure call, the name of which identifies or qualifies the identification of a resource (such as QuantityInStock above), such naming or qualification should when practical be represented in the URI to which the SOAP message is addressed. No standard means of representation of arguments or method names is provided by this specification.

Conventions for specific URI encodings of procedure names and arguments, as well as for controlling the inclusion of such arguments in the SOAP RPC body could be established in conjunction with the development of Web Service interface description languages, could be developed when SOAP is bound to particular programming languages, or could be established on an application or procedure-specific basis.

Distinguishing Resource Retrievals from other RPCs

The World Wide Web depends on mechanisms that optimize commonly performed information retrieval tasks. Specifically, protocols such as HTTP provide a GET method which is used to perform safe retrievals, I.e. to perform retrievals that are idempotent, free of side effects, and for which security considerations do not preclude the use of cached results or URI-based resource identification.

Certain procedure or method calls represent requests for information retrieval. For example, the call: "getQuantityInStock(PartNumber="123") might be used to retrieve the quantity established in the example above. The following conventions can be employed to implement SOAP retrievals and other RPC's on the Web:

The conventions described in are used to identify the resource with a URI.

In cases where all the arguments have been represented in the URI, no SOAP header blocks are to be transmitted, and the operation is a safe retrieval, the feature and the MEP is used. Accordingly, no SOAP envelope is transmitted for the request, and the webmeth:Method property is set to GET. The results of the retrieval are a SOAP RPC response as described in

In cases where the operation to be performed is not a retrieval, when SOAP headers are to be transmitted (a digital signature, for example), or when a retrieval is not safe, the feature and the MEP is used. The request envelope is encoded as described in , and the results are as described in . The webmeth:Method property is set to POST.

The SOAP RPC Representation does not define any other value for the webmeth:Method.

RPC and SOAP Body

RPC invocations (except for safe retrievals: see ) and responses are both carried in the SOAP Body element (see SOAP Body) using the following representation:

RPC Invocation

An RPC invocation is modeled as a struct where parameter access is by name or as an array where parameter access is by position.

The invocation is represented by a single struct or array containing an outbound edge for each [in] or [in/out] parameter. The struct or array is named identically to the procedure or method name (see ).

Each outbound edge either has a label corresponding to the name of the parameter (see ) or a position corresponding to the position of the parameter.

Applications MAY process invocations with missing parameters but also MAY fail to process the invocation and return a fault.

RPC Response

An RPC response is modeled as a struct where parameter access is by name or as an array where parameter access is by position.

The response is represented by a single struct or array containing an outbound edge for the return value and each [out] or [in/out] parameter.

If the response is represented by a struct, then each parameter is represented by an outbound edge with a label corresponding to the name of the parameter (see ). A non-void return value is represented in the struct by an outbound edge that may be given any unique label. The QName of the label of the edge representing the return value is given by a separate outbound edge with a local name of result and the namespace name http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-rpc. This result outbound edge MUST be present and hold the qname of the edge containing the return value within any struct response if the return value of the procedure is non-void. This result outbound edge MUST NOT be present if the return value of the procedure is void.

If the response is represented by an array, each outbound edge has a label corresponding to the position of the parameter. A return value MUST be present if the return value of the procedure is non-void. If present, the return value MUST be represented as the first edge of the array with parameters following. If no return value is present, then parameters begin with the first outbound edge of the array.

Invocation faults are handled according to the rules in . If a protocol binding adds additional rules for fault expression, those MUST also be followed.

An RPC response MUST NOT contain both a result and a fault, because a result indicates success and a fault indicates failure.

SOAP Encoding Restriction

When using SOAP encoding (see ) in conjunction with the RPC convention described here, the SOAP Body MUST contain only a single child element information item, that child being the serialized RPC invocation or response struct or array. I.e. when using the SOAP encoding for serializing RPC invocations and responses, the encoding is constrained to produce a single tree of element information items.

RPC and SOAP Header

Additional information relevant to the encoding of an RPC invocation but not part of the formal procedure or method signature MAY be expressed in a SOAP envelope carrying an RPC invocation or response. Such additional information MUST be expressed as SOAP header blocks.

RPC Faults

The SOAP RPC Representation introduces additional SOAP fault subcode values to be used in conjunction with the fault codes described in SOAP Fault Codes. The namespace name for these SOAP fault subcode values is http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-rpc and the namespace prefix rpc: is used in this section to indicate association with this namespace. A schema document for this namespace can be found at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-rpc .

Errors arising during RPC invocations are reported according to the following rules (in decreasing order of precedence):

A fault with a Value of env:Receiver for Code SHOULD be generated when the receiver cannot handle the message because of some temporary condition, e.g. when it is out of memory.

A fault with a Value of env:DataEncodingUnknown for Code SHOULD be generated when the arguments are encoded in a data encoding unknown to the receiver.

A fault with a Value of env:Sender for Code and a Value of rpc:ProcedureNotPresent for Subcode MAY be generated when the receiver does not support the procedure or method specified.

A fault with a Value of env:Sender for Code and a Value of rpc:BadArguments for Subcode MUST be generated when the receiver cannot parse the arguments or when there is a mismatch between what the receiver expects and what the sender has sent.

Other faults arising in an extension or from the application SHOULD be generated as described in SOAP Fault Codes.

In all cases the values of the Detail and Reason element information items are implementation defined. Details of their use MAY be specified by an external document.

Senders might receive different faults from those listed above in response to an RPC invocation if the receiver does support the (optional) RPC convention described here.

A Convention for Describing Features and Bindings

This section describes a convention describing Features (including MEPs) and Bindings in terms of properties and property values. The convention is sufficient to describe the distributed states of Feature and Binding specifications as mandated by the Binding Framework (see SOAP Protocol Binding Framework) and it is used to describe a Request-Response MEP and the SOAP HTTP Binding elsewhere in this document. Along with the convention itself, an informal model is defined that describes how properties propagate through a SOAP system. Note that this model is intended to be illustrative only, and is not meant to imply any constraints on the structure or layering of any particular SOAP implementation.

Model and Properties

In general, a SOAP message is the information that one SOAP node wishes to exchange with another SOAP node according to a particular set of features, including a MEP. In addition, there may be information essential to exchanging a message that is not part of the message itself. Such information is sometimes called message meta-data. In the model, the message, any message meta-data, and the various information items that enable features are represented as abstractions called properties.

Properties

Under the convention, properties are represented as follows:

Properties are named with XML qualified names (QNames). For example, myNS:RetryCount where RetryCount is the name of the property, and myNS is a prefix mapped to a namespace.

Property values are typed, and the type of a property-value is defined by an XML Schema simple datatype in the specification which introduces the property. For example, the type of RetryCount is xsi:int.

Property Scope

Properties within a SOAP node can differ in terms of their scope and the origins of their values. Some properties are scoped per message-exchange, while others have a wider significance. For example, the scope of a SOAP message property is per message-exchange, but the scope of a User Identity property may extend beyond the exchange of a single message. The values of some properties arise directly from the operations of the SOAP node and message exchanges, while others arise in implementation specific ways due to the local environment. As shown in the figure below, we make the distinction between per message-exchange and more widely scoped properties by assigning them to different containers called Message Exchange Context and Environment respectively. All properties, regardless of their scope, are shared by SOAP and a particular Binding.

The values of properties in Environment may depend upon local circumstances (as depicted by the external arrow from Environment in the figure above). More specifically, the properties in the example could be influenced by an Operating System User ID on whose behalf a message exchange is being executed. The mapping of information in a particular implementation to such properties is outside the scope of the binding framework although the abstract representation of such information as properties is not.

Properties and Features

A feature may be expressed through multiple properties and a single property may enable more than one feature. For example, the properties called User ID and Password may be used to enable a feature called Authentication. As a second example, a single property called Message ID could be used to enable one feature called Transaction and a second feature called Message Correlation.

SOAP-Supplied Message Exchange Patterns and Features Property Conventions for Message Exchange Patterns

describes the properties (in accordance with the property naming conventions defined in this document) that support the description of message exchange patterns (MEPs). Other properties may be involved in the specification of particular MEPs, but the properties in this table are generally applicable to all MEPs.

Property definitions supporting the description of MEPs
Property Name	Property Description
context:ExchangePatternName	A URI that names the MEP in operation.
context:FailureReason	A URI value that denotes a pattern specific, binding independent reason for the failure of a message exchange. Underlying protocol binding specifications may define properties to convey more binding specific details of the failure.

Request-Response Message Exchange Pattern

This section defines the message exchange pattern (MEP) called "Request-Response". The description is an abstract presentation of the operation of this MEP. It is not intended to describe a real implementation or to suggest how a real implementation should be structured.

SOAP Feature Name

This message exchange pattern is identified by the URI:

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/

Protocol binding specifications may use this URI to declare their support for the MEP and its associated semantics.

Description

The Request-Response MEP defines a pattern for the exchange of two messages between two adjacent SOAP nodes along a SOAP message path. One message is exchanged in each direction between a requesting SOAP node and a responding SOAP node.

In the normal operation of a message exchange conforming to the Request-Response MEP, a request message is first transferred from the requesting SOAP node to the responding SOAP node. Following the successful processing of the request message by the responding SOAP node, a response message is transferred from the responding SOAP node to the requesting SOAP node.

Abnormal operation during a Request-Response message exchange might be caused by a failure to transfer the request message, a failure at the responding SOAP node to process the request message, or a failure to transfer the response message. Such failures might be silent at either or both of the requesting and responding SOAP nodes involved, or might result in the generation of a SOAP or binding-specific fault (see ). Also, during abnormal operation each SOAP node involved in the message exchange might differ in its determination of the successful completion of the message exchange.

The scope of a Request-Response MEP is limited to the exchange of a request message and a response message between one requesting and one responding SOAP node. This pattern does not mandate any correlation between multiple requests nor specific timing for multiple requests. Implementations MAY choose to support multiple ongoing requests (and associated response processing) at the same time.

State Machine Description

The Request-Response MEP defines a set of properties described in .

Property definitions for Request-Response MEP
Property Name	Property Description
reqres:Role	A URI denoting the pattern specific role of the local SOAP node participating in the message exchange.
reqres:State	A URI denoting the current state of the message exchange. This value is managed by the binding instance and may be inspected by other entities monitoring the progress of the message exchange.
reqres:OutboundMessage	An abstract structure that represents the current outbound message in the message exchange. This abstracts both SOAP Envelope and any other information structures that are transferred along with the envelope.
reqres:InboundMessage	An abstract structure that represents the current inbound message in the message exchange. This abstracts both SOAP Envelope and any other information structures that are transferred along with the envelope.
reqres:ImmediateDestination	A URI denoting the immediate destination of an outbound message.
reqres:ImmediateSender	A URI denoting the immediate sender of an inbound message.

To initiate a message exchange conforming to the Request-Response MEP, the requesting SOAP node instantiates a local message exchange context. describes how the context is initialized.

Instantiation of a Message Exchange Context for a requesting SOAP node
Property Name	Property Value
context:ExchangePatternName	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/
context:FailureReason	None
reqres:Role	RequestingSOAPNode
reqres:State	Init
reqres:OutboundMessage	An abstraction of the request message
reqres:ImmediateDestination	An identifier (URI) that denotes the responding SOAP node

There may be other properties related to the operation of the message exchange context instance. Such properties are initialized according to their own feature specifications.

Once the message exchange context is initialized, control of the context is passed to a (conforming) local binding instance.

The diagram below shows the logical state transitions at the requesting and responding SOAP nodes during the lifetime of the message exchange. At each SOAP node, the local binding instance updates (logically) the value of the reqres:State property to reflect the current state of the message exchange. The state names are relative URIs, relative to a Base URI value carried in the reqres:Role property of the local message exchange context.

When the local binding instance at the responding SOAP node starts to receive an inbound request message, it (logically) instantiates a message exchange context. describes the properties that the binding initializes as part of the context's instantiation.

Instantiation of Message Exchange Context for an inbound request message
Property Name	Property Value
context:ExchangePatternName	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/ Initialized as early as possible during the life cycle of the message exchange.
context:FailureReason	None
reqres:Role	RespondingSOAPNode Initialized as early as possible during the life cycle the message exchange.
reqres:State	Init

When the requesting and responding SOAP nodes transition between states, the local binding instance (logically) updates a number of properties. and describe these updates for the requesting and the responding SOAP nodes, respectively.

Requesting SOAP Node State Transitions
CurrentState	Transition Condition	NextState	Action
Init	Unconditional	Requesting	Initiate transmission of request message abstracted in reqres:OutboundMessage.
Requesting	Message transmission failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to transmissionFailure
Requesting	Start receiving response message	Sending+Receiving	Set reqres:ImmediateSender to denote the sender of the response message (may differ from the values in reqres:ImmediateDestination). Start making an abstraction of the response message available in reqres:InboundMessgae.
Sending+Receiving	Message exchange failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to exchangeFailure
Sending+Receiving	Completed sending request message. Completed receiving response message.	Success

Responding SOAP Node State Transitions
CurrentState	Transition Condition	NextState	Action
Init	Start receiving request message	Receiving	Set reqres:ImmediateSender to denote the sender of the request message (if determinable). Start making an abstraction of the request message available in reqres:InboundMessgae. Pass control of message exchange context to SOAP processor.
Receiving	Message reception failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to receptionFailure.
Receiving	Start of response message available in reqres:OutboundMessage	Receiving+Sending	Initiate transmission of response message abstracted in reqres:OutboundMessage.
Receiving+Sending	Message exchange failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to exchangeFailure.
Receiving+Sending	Completed receiving request message. Completed sending response message.	Success

Bindings that implement this MEP MAY provide for streaming of SOAP responses. That is, responding SOAP nodes MAY begin transmission of a SOAP response while a SOAP request is still being received and processed. When SOAP nodes implement bindings that support streaming, the following rules apply:

All the rules in Binding Framework regarding streaming of individual SOAP messages MUST be obeyed for both request and response SOAP messages.

When using streaming SOAP bindings, requesting SOAP nodes MUST avoid deadlock by accepting and if necessary processing SOAP response information while the SOAP request is being transmitted.

Depending on the implementation used and the size of the messages involved, this rule MAY require that SOAP applications stream application-level response processing in parallel with request generation.

A requesting SOAP node MAY enter the Fail state, and thus abort transmission of the outbound SOAP request, based on information contained in an incoming streamed SOAP response.

Fault Handling

During the operation of the Request-Response MEP, the participating SOAP nodes may generate SOAP faults.

If a SOAP fault is generated by the responding SOAP node while it is in the Receiving state, the SOAP fault is made available in reqres:OutboundMessage and the state machine transitions to the Receiving+Sending state.

This MEP makes no claims about the disposition or handling of SOAP faults generated by the requesting SOAP node during any processing of the response message that follows the Success state in the requesting SOAP node's state transition table (see ).

SOAP Response Message Exchange Pattern

This section defines the message exchange pattern (MEP) called "SOAP Response". The description is an abstract presentation of the operation of this MEP. It is not intended to describe a real implementation or to suggest how a real implementation should be structured.

SOAP Feature Name

This message exchange pattern is identified by the URI:

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/soap-response/

Protocol binding specifications may use this URI to declare their support for the MEP and its associated semantics.

Description

The SOAP Response MEP defines a pattern for the exchange of a non-SOAP message acting as a request followed by a SOAP message acting as a response. In the absence of errors or faults, this message exchange pattern consists of two messages, only one of which is a SOAP envelope:

A request transmitted in a binding-specific manner that does not include a SOAP envelope and hence does not involve any SOAP processing by the receiving SOAP node.

A response message which contains a SOAP envelope. The MEP is completed by the processing of the SOAP envelope following the rules of the SOAP processing model (see [ref. to chapter 2]).

Abnormal operation during a SOAP Response message exchange might be caused by a failure to transfer the request message or the response message. Such failures might be silent at either or both of the requesting and responding SOAP nodes involved, or might result in the generation of a SOAP or binding-specific fault (see section ). Also, during abnormal operation each SOAP node involved in the message exchange might differ in its determination of the successful completion of the message exchange.

The scope of a SOAP Response MEP is limited to the request for an exchange of a response message between one requesting and one responding SOAP node. This pattern does not mandate any correlation between multiple requests nor specific timing for multiple requests. Implementations MAY choose to support multiple ongoing requests (and associated response processing) at the same time.

This MEP cannot be used in conjunction with features expressed as SOAP header blocks in the request because there is no SOAP envelope in which to carry them.

State Machine Description

The SOAP Response MEP defines a set of properties described in .

Property definitions for SOAP Response MEP
Property Name	Property Description
reqres:Role	A URI denoting the pattern specific role of the local SOAP node participating in the message exchange.
reqres:State	A URI denoting the current state of the message exchange. This value is managed by the binding instance and may be inspected by other entities monitoring the progress of the message exchange.
reqres:OutboundMessage	An abstract structure that represents the current outbound message in the message exchange. This abstracts both SOAP Envelope Infoset (which MAY be null) and any other information structures that are transferred along with the envelope.
reqres:InboundMessage	An abstract structure that represents the current inbound message in the message exchange. This abstracts both SOAP Envelope Infoset (which MAY be null) and any other information structures that are transferred along with the envelope.
reqres:ImmediateDestination	A URI denoting the immediate destination of an outbound message.
reqres:ImmediateSender	A URI denoting the immediate sender of an inbound message.

To initiate a message exchange conforming to the SOAP Response MEP, the requesting SOAP node instantiates a local message exchange context. describes how the context is initialized.

Instantiation of a Message Exchange Context for a requesting SOAP node
Property Name	Property Value
context:ExchangePatternName	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/soap-response/
context:FailureReason	None
reqres:Role	RequestingSOAPNode
reqres:State	Init
reqres:OutboundMessage	An abstraction of the request message that does not include a SOAP envelope infoset.
reqres:ImmediateDestination	An identifier (URI) that denotes the responding SOAP node

There may be other properties related to the operation of the message exchange context instance. Such properties are initialized according to their own feature specifications.

Once the message exchange context is initialized, control of the context is passed to a (conforming) local binding instance.

Instantiation of Message Exchange Context for an inbound request message
Property Name	Property Value
context:ExchangePatternName	http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/soap-response/ Initialized as early as possible during the life cycle of the message exchange.
context:FailureReason	None
reqres:Role	RespondingSOAPNode Initialized as early as possible during the life cycle the message exchange.
reqres:State	Init

Requesting SOAP Node State Transitions
CurrentState	Transition Condition	NextState	Action
Init	Unconditional	Requesting	Initiate transmission of request message abstracted in reqres:OutboundMessage.
Requesting	Message transmission failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to transmissionFailure
Requesting	Start receiving response message	Sending+Receiving	Set reqres:ImmediateSender to denote the sender of the response message (may differ from the values in reqres:ImmediateDestination). Start making an abstraction of the response message available in reqres:InboundMessgae.
Sending+Receiving	Message exchange failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to exchangeFailure
Sending+Receiving	Completed receiving response message.	Success

Responding SOAP Node State Transitions
CurrentState	Transition Condition	NextState	Action
Init	Start receiving request message	Receiving	Set reqres:ImmediateSender to denote the sender of the request message (if determinable). making an abstraction of the request message available in reqres:InboundMessgae. Pass control of message exchange context to SOAP processor.
Receiving	Message reception failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to receptionFailure.
Receiving	Start of response message available in reqres:OutboundMessage	Receiving+Sending	Initiate transmission of response message abstracted in reqres:OutboundMessage.
Receiving+Sending	Message exchange failure	Fail	Set context:FailureReason to exchangeFailure.
Receiving+Sending	Completed sending response message.	Success

All the rules in Binding Framework regarding streaming of individual SOAP messages MUST be obeyed for both request and response SOAP messages.

When using streaming SOAP bindings, requesting SOAP nodes MUST avoid deadlock by accepting and if necessary processing SOAP response information while the SOAP request is being transmitted.

A requesting SOAP node MAY enter the Fail state, and thus abort transmission of the outbound SOAP request, based on information contained in an incoming streamed SOAP response.

Fault Handling

During the operation of the SOAP Response MEP, the participating SOAP nodes may generate SOAP faults.

This MEP makes no claims about the disposition of SOAP faults generated by the responding SOAP node.

A responding SOAP node MAY express fault information as a result of processing the request in the form of a SOAP fault. This can for example be used to express information that might be useful to a receiving SOAP node. If a SOAP fault is generated by the responding SOAP node while it is in the Receiving state, the SOAP fault is made available in reqres:OutboundMessage and the state machine transitions to the Receiving+Sending state.

Web Method Specification Feature

This section defines the "Web Method Specification Feature".

SOAP Feature Name

This Web Method Specification Feature is identified by the URI:

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/features/web-method/

Protocol binding specifications may use this URI to declare their support for the this feature and its associated semantics.

Description

Underlying protocols designed for use on the World Wide Web provide for manipulation of resources using a small set of Web methods such as GET, PUT, POST, and DELETE. These methods are formally defined in the HTTP specification , but other underlying protocols might also support them. Bindings to HTTP or such other protocols SHOULD use the Web Method Specification Feature to give applications control over the Web methods to be used when sending a SOAP message.

Bindings supporting this feature SHOULD use the appropriate embodiment of that method if provided by the underlying protocol; for example, the HTTP binding provided with this specification represents the GET Web method as an HTTP GET request, and the POST method as an HTTP POST request (see ). Bindings supporting this feature SHOULD provide to the receiving node indication of the Web method used for transmission.

The SOAP Web Method Specification Feature MAY be implemented by bindings to underlying transports that have no preferred embodiment of particular Web methods (E.g. do not distinguish GET from POST). Such bindings SHOULD provide to the receiving node indication of the Web method used for transmission, but need take no other action in support of the feature.

Web Method Feature State Machine

The Web Method Feature defines a single property, which is described in .

Property definition for the Web Method Feature
Property Name	Property Description
webmeth:Method	One of GET, POST, PUT, DELETE (or others which may subsequently be added to the repertoire of Web methods.)

This specification provides for the use of the Web Method Feature in conjunction with the and message exchange patterns. This feature MAY be used with other MEPs if and only if provided for in the specifications of those MEPs.

A node sending a request message MUST provide a value for the webmeth:Method property. A protocol binding supporting this feature SHOULD set the value of the webmeth:Method property at the receiving node to match that provided by the sender; the means of transmission for the method property is binding-specific. A responding node SHOULD respond in a manner consistent with the Method requested (e.g. a GET should result in retrieval of a representation of the identified resource) or SHOULD fault in an application-specific manner if the Web method cannot be supported.

Applications SHOULD use GET as the value of webmeth:Method in conjunction with the to support information retrievals which are safe, and for which no parameters other than a URI are required; I.e. when performing retrievals which are idempotent, known to be free of side effects, for which no SOAP request headers are required, and for which security considerations do not conflict with the possibility that cached results would be used. Except in unusual circumstances, other operations SHOULD be performed using POST in conjunction with the . Other methods SHOULD not in general be used. For example, use of PUT would suggest storing the SOAP envelope Infoset as the created resource, as opposed to processing in the manner required by the SOAP processing model.

SOAP HTTP Binding Introduction

The SOAP HTTP Binding provides a binding of SOAP to HTTP. The binding conforms to the SOAP Protocol Binding Framework (see SOAP Protocol Binding Framework). It uses abstract binding properties as a descriptive tool for defining the functionality of certain features.

Certain optional features provided by this binding depend on capabilities provided by HTTP Version 1.1, for example content negotiation. Implementations SHOULD thus use HTTP 1.1 (or later compatible versions that share the same major version number). Implementations MAY also be deployed using HTTP Version 1.0, although in this case certain optional binding features may not be provided.

SOAP HTTP Binding implementations need to account for the fact that HTTP 1.0 intermediaries may alter the representation of SOAP messages, even in situations where both the initial SOAP sender and ultimate SOAP receiver use HTTP 1.1.

The SOAP Protocol Binding Framework (see SOAP Protocol Binding Framework), the Message Exchange Pattern Specifications (see SOAP Message Exchange Patterns) and Feature Specifications (see ) each describe the properties they expect to be present in a message exchange context when control of that context passes between a local SOAP node and a binding instance.

Properties are named with XML qualified names. Property values are determined by the Schema type of the property, as defined in the specification which introduces the property.

Conforming implementations of this binding:

MUST be capable of sending and receiving messages serialized using media type application/soap+xml whose proper use and parameters are described in .

MAY send requests and responses using other media types providing that such media types provide for at least the transfer of SOAP XML Infoset.

MAY, when sending requests, provide an HTTP Accept header. This header:

SHOULD indicate an ability to accept at minimum application/soap+xml.

MAY additionally indicate willingness to accept other media types that satisfy 2 above.

The SOAP HTTP Binding is optional and SOAP nodes are NOT required to implement it. The SOAP version 1.2 specification does not preclude specifications of other bindings to HTTP or bindings to other protocols. A SOAP node that correctly and completely implements the SOAP HTTP Binding may to be said to "conform to the SOAP 1.2 HTTP Binding."

Particularly when used with the , the HTTP messages produced by this binding are likely to be indistinguishable from those produced by non-SOAP implementations performing similar operations. Accordingly, some degree of interoperation can be made possible between SOAP nodes and other HTTP implementations when using this binding. For example, a conventional Web server (I.e. one not written specifically to conform to this specification) might be used to respond to SOAP-initiated HTTP GET's with representations of content-type application/soap+xml. Such interoperation is not a normative feature of this specification.

Binding Name

The binding is identified with the URI:

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/bindings/HTTP/

Supported Message Exchange Patterns

An implementation of the SOAP HTTP Binding MUST support the following message exchange patterns (MEPs):

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/request-response/ (see )

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/mep/soap-response/ (see )

Supported Features

An implementation of the SOAP HTTP Binding MUST support the following feature:

http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap/features/web-method/ (see )

MEP Operation

For binding instances conforming to this specification:

A SOAP node instantiated at an HTTP client may assume the role (i.e. the property reqres:Role) of RequestingSOAPNode.

A SOAP node instantiated at an HTTP server may assume the role (ie. the property reqres:Role) of RespondingSOAPNode.

The remainder of this section describes the MEP state machine and its relation to the HTTP protocol. In the state tables below, the states are defined as values of the property reqres:State (see ), and are of type reqres:StateType (an enumeration over xs:string).

Failure reasons that are specified in the tables represent values of the property context:FailureReason and their values are XML qualified names. If an implementation enters the Fail state, the context:FailureReason property will contain the value specified for the particular transition.

Behavior of Requesting SOAP Node

The overall flow of the behavior of a requesting SOAP node follows a state machine description consistent with both and (differences are indicated as necessary.) This binding supports streaming and, as a result, requesting SOAP nodes MUST avoid deadlock by accepting and if necessary processing SOAP response information while the SOAP request is being transmitted (see ). The following subsections describe each state in detail.

Init

and describe the requesting SOAP node's Init state and the values of the HTTP request fields.

State Description: Init
Transitions	Event/Condition	NextState	Failure Reason
Statename	Init
Description	Formulate and start sending HTTP request (see next table)
Preconditions	See and
Postconditions	None
Transitions	Unconditional	Requesting	N/A

HTTP Request Fields
Field	Value
HTTP Method	According to the webmeth:Method property (typically POST or GET).
Request URI	The value of the URI carried in the reqres:ImmediateDestination property of the message exchange context.
Content-Type header	The media type of the request entity body (if present) otherwise, omitted (see for a description of permissible media types). If the SOAP envelope infoset in the reqres:OutboundMessage property is null, then the Content-Type header field MAY be omitted.
Accept header (optional)	List of media types that are acceptable in response to the request message.
Additional Headers	Generated in accordance with the rules for the binding specific expression of any optional features in use for this message exchange.
HTTP entity body	SOAP message serialized according to the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media type given by the Content-Type header. Rules for carrying SOAP messages in media type application/soap+xml are given in . If the SOAP envelope infoset in the reqres:OutboundMessage property is null, then no serialization of the SOAP message is required and the entity body MAY be omitted.

Requesting

describes the requesting SOAP node's Requesting state.

State Description: Requesting
Transitions	Event/Condition	NextState	Failure Reason
Statename	Requesting
Description	Sending request message and waiting for start of response message.
Preconditions	None
Postconditions	Property reqres:ImmediateSender instantiated with a URI value that denotes the sender of the HTTP response (if known) HTTP headers significant to features expressed outside the SOAP envelope processed in accordance with the relevant feature specification.
	HTTP Response Status Line and HTTP Headers received	(see status code table below)	(see status code table below)
	Message exchange failure	Fail	fail:transmissionFailure

details the transitions that take place when a requesting SOAP node reveives an HTTP status line and response headers.

HTTP status code dependent transitions
Status Code	Reason phrase	Significance/Action		NextState
2xx	Successful
200	OK	The response message follows in HTTP response entity body. Start making an abstraction of the response message available in reqres:InboundMessage.		Sending+Receiving
202	Accepted	The request message has been received and processed. The entity body of the HTTP response MAY contain a response message. Start making an abstraction of the response message available in reqres:InboundMessage		Sending+Receiving
204	No Content	The request message has been received and processed. The HTTP response MUST NOT contain an entity body. The message exchange is regarded as having completed successfully.		Sending+Receiving
		Instantiated Property	Value
		reqres:InboundMessage	"Empty" SOAP Envelope.
3xx	Redirection	The requested resource has moved and the HTTP request SHOULD be retried using the URI carried in the associated Location header as the new value for the reqres:ImmediateDestination property.		Init
4xx	Client Error
400	Bad Request	Indicates a problem with the received HTTP request message. The problem may bea malformed XML in the request message envelope. This operation SHOULD NOT be repeated with the same message content. The message exchange is regarded as having completed unsuccessfully.		Fail
		Instantiated Property	Value
		context:FailureReason	fail:BadRequest
401	Unauthorized	Indicates that the HTTP request requires authorization.		Requesting
		Instantiated Property	Value
		context:FailureReason	fail:AuthenticationFailure
		If the simple authentication feature is unavailable or the operation of simple authentication ultimately fails, then the message exchange is regarded as having completed unsuccessfully.		Fail
		Instantiated Property	Value
		context:FailureReason	fail:AuthenticationFailure
405	Method not allowed	Indicates that the peer HTTP server does not support the requested HTTP method at the given request URI. The message exchange is regarded as having completed unsuccessfully.		Fail
		Instantiated Property	Value
		context:FailureReason	fail:BindingMismatch
415	Unsupported Media Type	Indicates that the peer HTTP server does not support Content-type used to encode the request message. The message exchange is regarded as having completed unsuccessfully.		Fail
		Instantiated Property	Value
		context:FailureReason	fail:BindingMismatch
5xx	Server Error
500	Internal Server Error	Indicates that the response message contained in the following HTTP response entity body may contain an SOAP fault. Other internal server errors may be the cause of this status code. The local binding instance continues to receive the incoming message.		Sending+Receiving
		Instantiated Property	Value
		context:FailureReason	fail:ServerFault

There may be elements in the HTTP infrastructure configured to modify HTTP response entity bodies for 4xx and 5xx status code responses. For example, some HTTP origin servers have such a feature as a configuration option. This behavior may interfere with the use of 4xx and 5xx status code responses carrying SOAP fault messages in HTTP and it is recommended that such behavior is disabled for resources accepting SOAP/HTTP requests. If the rewriting behavior cannot be disabled, SOAP/HTTP cannot be used in such configurations.

Sending+Receiving

describes the requesting SOAP node's Sending+Receiving state.

State Description: Sending+Receiving
Transitions	Event/Condition	NextState	Failure Reason
Statename	Sending+Receiving
Description	Completing the transmission of a request message and the reception of a response message. The response message is assumed to be a SOAP envelope serialized according the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media type given in the Content-Type header.
Preconditions	None
Postconditions	On transitions to Success, the property reqres:InboundMessage is instantiated with the Infoset representation of the serialized envelope in the response body.

	Request message transmission and response message reception completed and a well formed response message received	Success	N/A
	Reception Failure (broken connections etc.)	Fail	fail:ReceptionFailure
	Packaging Failure (including mismatched Content-Type)	Fail	fail:PackagingFailure
	Malformed response message, e.g. malformed XML, message contains a DTD, invalid SOAP Envelope	Fail	fail:BadResponseMessage

The response MAY be of content type other than application/soap+xml. Such a result is particularly likely when a SOAP request sent with a webmeth:Method of GET is directed (intentionally or otherwise) to a non-SOAP HTTP server. Such usage is considered non-normative, and accordingly is not modeled in the state machine above. Interpretation of such responses is at the discretion of the receiver.

Success and Fail

Succes and Fail are the terminal states of a Request-Response MEP. Control over the message exchange context returns to the local SOAP node.

Behavior of Responding SOAP Node

The overall flow of the behavior of a responding SOAP node follows a state machine description consistent with both and (differences are indicated as necessary). The following subsections describe each state in detail.

Init

and describe the responding SOAP node's Init state and the faults it generates respectively.

State Description: Init
Transitions	Event/Condition	NextState	Action
Statename	Init
Description	Waiting for the start of an inbound request message
Preconditions	Reception of an HTTP request at an HTTP endpoint bound to the local SOAP node, see . Additionally, the webmeth:Method property is set to match the HTTP Method of the received request.
Postconditions	See below
	Receive the beginning of an HTTP POST request containing well formed request message.	Receiving	Instantiate or replace the property reqres:ImmediateSender with a URI value that denotes the sender of the HTTP request (if known) Start making an abstraction of the request message available in reqres:InboundMessage. Any HTTP headers that are significant to features expressed outside the SOAP envelope are processed in accordance with the relevant feature specification. This change of state represents a transfer of control of the inbound message exchange context to the local SOAP node.
	Receive HTTP POST request containing malformed request message	Fail	The message is considered to have been intended for the local SOAP node. It is considered to be malformed becuase it is not well formed XML, contains a serialized DTD, and/or contains an invalid SOAP envelope. The local SOAP node generates a SOAP fault message in accordance with the following table and sends it in the corresponding HTTP response message, accompanied by a status code value appropriate to the particular fault. The message exchange context may be destroyed or considered not to have been created.
	Receive HTTP GET request containing well formed request message	Receiving	Instantiate or replace the property reqres:ImmediateSender with a URI value that denotes the sender of the HTTP request (if known) Start making an abstraction of the request message available in reqres:InboundMessage. Any HTTP headers that are significant to features expressed outside the SOAP envelope are processed in accordance with the relevant feature specification. This change of state represents a transfer of control of the inbound message exchange context to the local SOAP node.

Binding Generated Faults
Problem with Message	HTTP Status Code	HTTP Reason Phrase (informative)	SOAP Fault
Malformed Request Message	400	Bad request	None
HTTP Method is neither POST nor GET	405	Method Not Allowed	None
Unsupported message encapsulation method	415	Unsupported Media	None

Receiving

describes the responding SOAP node's Receiving state.

State Description: Receiving
Transitions	Event/Condition	NextState	Action or Failure Reason
Statename	Receiving
Description	Continue receiving the request message and wait for the start of a response message to be available in the message exchange context.
Preconditions	None
Postconditions	See below
	The start of an abstraction of a response message becomes available in reqres:OutboundMessage indicating that the local SOAP processor has generating a response message.	Receiving+Sending	Formulate and start sending the response message, reqres:OutboundMessage may contain a SOAP fault.
	Message reception failure	Fail	fail:receptionFailure

and describe the HTTP response headers generated by the responding SOAP node.

HTTP Response Headers
Header	Value
Status line	Set according to the next table
Content-Type header	The media type of the response body, see for a description of permissible media types.
Additional Headers	Generated in accordance with the rules for the binding specific expression of any optional features in use for this message exchange.
HTTP Entity Body	SOAP message serialized according to the rules for carrying SOAP messages in the media type given by the Content-Type header. Rules for carrying SOAP messages in application/soap+xml are given in .

SOAP Fault to HTTP Status Mapping
SOAP Fault	HTTP Status Code	HTTP Reason Phrase (informative)
env:VersionMismatch	500	Internal server error
env:MustUnderstand	500	Internal server error
env:Sender	400	Bad request
env:Receiver	500	Internal server error

Receiving+Sending

describes the responding SOAP node's Responding state.

State Description: Receiving+Sending
Transitions	Event/Condition	NextState	Action or Failure Reason
Statename	Receiving+Sending
Description	Completing request message reception and response message transmission.
Preconditions	None
Postconditions	See below
	Response message reception and request message transmission complete.	Success
	Message exchange failure	Fail	fail:exchangeFailure.

Success and Fail

Success and Fail are the terminal states for a Request-Response MEP. From the point-of-view of the local node this message exchange has completed.

Security Considerations

The SOAP HTTP Binding (see ) can be considered as an extension of the HTTP application protocol. As such, all of the security considerations identified and described in section 15 of the HTTP specification[2] apply to the SOAP HTTP Binding in addition to those described in "Security Considerations". Implementors of the SOAP HTTP Binding should carefully review this material.

References Normative References W3C Working Draft "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: Messaging Framework", Martin Gudgin, Marc Hadley, Jean-Jacques Moreau, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, &draft.day; &draft.month; &draft.year; IETF "RFC 2616: Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. C. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-Lee, January 1997. IETF "RFC 2119: Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", S. Bradner, March 1997. W3C Recommendation "XML Schema Part 1: Structures", Henry S. Thompson, David Beech, Murray Maloney, Noah Mendelsohn, 2 May 2001. W3C Recommendation "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes", Paul V. Biron, Ashok Malhotra, 2 May 2001. IETF "RFC 2396: Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding, L. Masinter, August 1998. W3C Recommendation "Namespaces in XML", Tim Bray, Dave Hollander, Andrew Layman, 14 January 1999. W3C Recommendation "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition)", Tim Bray, Jean Paoli, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Eve Maler, 6 October 2000. W3C Recommendation "XML Linking Language (XLink) Version 1.0", Steve DeRose, Eve Maler, David Orchard, 27 June 2001. W3C Recommendation "XML Information Set", John Cowan, Richard Tobin, 24 October 2001. IETF "RFC 3023: XML Media Types", M. Murata, S. St. Laurent, D. Kohn, July 1998. IETF "INTERNET DRAFT: The 'application/soap+xml' media type", M. Baker, M. Nottingham, January 14, 2002. (Work in progress). Informative References W3C Working Draft "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer", Nilo Mitra, &draft.day; &draft.month; &draft.year; XML Protocol Comments Archive XML Protocol Discussion Archive XML Protocol Charter IETF "RFC2045: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", N. Freed, N. Borenstein, November 1996. IETF "RFC 2026: The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", section 4.2.3, S. Bradner, October 1996. Mapping Application Defined Names to XML Names Hex DigitshexDigit[0-9A-F] Rules for mapping application defined names to XML Names

XML Name has two parts: Prefix and LocalPart. Let Prefix be computed per the rules and constraints specified in Namespaces in XML .

Let TAG be a name in an application. TAG is a sequence of characters of the application. Let N be the number of characters in TAG. Let T₁, T₂, ... , T_N be the characters of TAG, in order from left to right.

Let M be the implementation-defined mapping of the characters of the application to characters of Unicode.

For each i between 1 (one) and N, let M_i be M(T_i).

For each i between 1 (one) and N, let X_i be the Unicode character string defined by the following rules.

Case:

If T_i has no mapping to Unicode (i.e. M(T_i) is undefined), then X_i is implementation-defined

If i<=N-1, T_i is _ (underscore), and T_i+1 is x (lowercase letter x), then let X_i be _x005F_.

If i=1, N>=3, T₁ is either x (lowercase letter x) or X (uppercase letter X), T₂ is either m (lowercase letter m) or M (uppercase letter M), and T₃ is either l (lowercase letter l) or L (uppercase letter L), then let X_i be _xFFFF_ T₁

If T_i is not a valid XML NCName character or if i=1 (one) and T₁ is not a valid first character of an XML NCName, then:

Let U₁, U₂, ... , U₈ be the eight hex digits such that T_i is U+ U₁ U₂ ... U₈ in the UCS-4 encoding.

Case:

If U₁=0, U₂=0, U₃=0, and U₄=0, then let X_i=_x U₅ U₆ U₇ U₈ _.

This case implies that T_i has a UCS-2 encoding, which is U+U₅U₆U₇U₈.

Otherwise, let X_i be _x U₁ U₂ U₃ U₄ U₅ U₆ U₇ U₈ _.

Otherwise, let X_i be M_i. That is, any character in TAG that is a valid character in an XML NCName is simply copied.

Let LocalPart be the character string concatenation of X₁, X₂, ... , X_N in order from left to right.

Let XML Name be the QName per Namespaces in XML

Examples Hello world -> Hello_x0020_world Hello_xorld -> Hello_x005F_xorld Helloworld_ -> Helloworld_ x -> x xml -> _xFFFF_xml -xml -> _x002D_xml x-ml -> x-ml

Using W3C XML Schema with SOAP Encoding

As noted in SOAP graph nodes are labeled with type names, but validation of encoded SOAP messages MUST NOT be required by conforming processors. These sections describe techniques that can be used when validation with W3C XML schemas is desired for use by SOAP applications. Any errors or faults resulting from such validation are beyond those covered by the normative recommendation; from the perspective of SOAP, such faults are considered to be application-level failures.

Validating using the minimum schema

Although W3C XML schemas are conventionally exchanged in the form of schema documents (see ), the schema recommendation is build on an abstract definition of schemas, to which all processors need to conform. The schema recommendation provides that all such schemas include definitions for a core set of built in types, such as integers, dates, and so on (see , Built-in Simple Type Definition). Thus, it is possible to discuss validation of a SOAP message against such a minimal schema, which is the one that would result from providing no additional definitions or declarations (i.e. no schema document) to a schema processor.

The minimal schema provides that any well formed XML document will validate, except that where an xsi:type is provided, the type named must be built in, and the corresponding element must be valid per that type. Thus, validation of a SOAP 1.2 message using a minimal schema approximates the behavior of the built-in types of SOAP 1.1.

Validating using the SOAP Encoding schema

Validation against the minimal schema (see ) will not succed where encoded graph nodes have multiple inbound edges. The SOAP Encoding of such graphs MAY be validated against the SOAP Encoding schema. In order for the encoding to validate, edge labels, and hence element namespace names and local names, need to match those defined in the SOAP Encoding schema. Validation of the encoded graph against the SOAP Encoding schema would result in the type name property of the nodes in the graph being assigned the relevant type name.

Validating using more specific schemas

It may be that schemas could be constructed to describe the encoding of certain graphs. Validation of the encoded graph against such a schema would result in the type name property of the graph nodes being assigned the relevant type name.

Acknowledgements

This document is the work of the W3C XML Protocol Working Group.

Members of the Working Group are (at the time of writing, and by alphabetical order): Yasser al Safadi (Philips Research), Vidur Apparao (Netscape), Don Box (DevelopMentor), Charles Campbell (Informix Software), Michael Champion (Software AG), Dave Cleary (webMethods), Ugo Corda (Xerox), Paul Cotton (Microsoft Corporation), Ron Daniel (Interwoven), Glen Daniels (Allaire), Doug Davis (IBM), Ray Denenberg (Library of Congress), Paul Denning (MITRE Corporation), Frank DeRose (TIBCO Software, Inc.), Colleen Evans (Progress Software), James Falek (TIBCO Software, Inc.), David Fallside (IBM), Chris Ferris (Sun Microsystems), Daniela Florescu (Propel), Dietmar Gaertner (Software AG), Rich Greenfield (Library of Congress), Martin Gudgin (DevelopMentor), Hugo Haas (W3C), Marc Hadley (Sun Microsystems), Mark Hale (Interwoven), Randy Hall (Intel), Gerd Hoelzing (SAP AG), Oisin Hurley (IONA Technologies), Yin-Leng Husband (Compaq), John Ibbotson (IBM), Ryuji Inoue (Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.), Scott Isaacson (Novell, Inc.), Kazunori Iwasa (Fujitsu Software Corporation), Murali Janakiraman (Rogue Wave), Mario Jeckle (Daimler-Chrysler Research and Technology), Eric Jenkins (Engenia Software), Mark Jones (AT&T), Anish Karmarkar (Oracle), Jeffrey Kay (Engenia Software), Richard Koo (Vitria Technology Inc.), Jacek Kopecky (IDOOX s.r.o.), Yves Lafon (W3C), Tony Lee (Vitria Technology Inc.), Michah Lerner (AT&T), Henry Lowe (OMG), Richard Martin (Active Data Exchange), Noah Mendelsohn (Lotus Development), Jeff Mischkinsky (Oracle), Nilo Mitra (Ericsson Research Canada), Jean-Jacques Moreau (Canon), Highland Mary Mountain (Intel), Masahiko Narita (Fujitsu Software Corporation), Mark Needleman (Data Research Associates), Eric Newcomer (IONA Technologies), Henrik Frystyk Nielsen (Microsoft Corporation), Mark Nottingham (Akamai Technologies), David Orchard (BEA Systems), Kevin Perkins (Compaq), Jags Ramnaryan (BEA Systems), Andreas Riegg (Daimler-Chrysler Research and Technology), Herve Ruellan (Canon), Marwan Sabbouh (MITRE Corporation), Shane Sesta (Active Data Exchange), Miroslav Simek (IDOOX s.r.o.), Simeon Simeonov (Allaire), Nick Smilonich (Unisys), Soumitro Tagore (Informix Software), Lynne Thompson (Unisys), Patrick Thompson (Rogue Wave), Asir Vedamuthu (webMethods) Ray Whitmer (Netscape), Volker Wiechers (SAP AG), Stuart Williams (Hewlett-Packard), Amr Yassin (Philips Research) and Jin Yu (Martsoft Corp.).

Previous members were: Eric Fedok (Active Data Exchange), Susan Yee (Active Data Exchange), Dan Frantz (BEA Systems), Alex Ceponkus (Bowstreet), James Tauber (Bowstreet), Rekha Nagarajan (Calico Commerce), Mary Holstege (Calico Commerce), Krishna Sankar (Cisco Systems), David Burdett (Commerce One), Murray Maloney (Commerce One), Jay Kasi (Commerce One), Yan Xu (DataChannel), Brian Eisenberg (DataChannel), Mike Dierken (DataChannel), Michael Freeman (Engenia Software), Bjoern Heckel (Epicentric), Dean Moses (Epicentric), Julian Kumar (Epicentric), Miles Chaston (Epicentric), Alan Kropp (Epicentric), Scott Golubock (Epicentric), Michael Freeman (Engenia Software), Jim Hughes (Fujitsu Limited), Dick Brooks (Group 8760), David Ezell (Hewlett Packard), Fransisco Cubera (IBM), David Orchard (Jamcracker), Alex Milowski (Lexica), Steve Hole (MessagingDirect Ltd.), John-Paul Sicotte (MessagingDirect Ltd.), Vilhelm Rosenqvist (NCR), Lew Shannon (NCR), Art Nevarez (Novell, Inc.), David Clay (Oracle), Jim Trezzo (Oracle), David Cleary (Progress Software), Andrew Eisenberg (Progress Software), Peter Lecuyer (Progress Software), Ed Mooney (Sun Microsystems), Mark Baker (Sun Microsystems), Anne Thomas Manes (Sun Microsystems), George Scott (Tradia Inc.), Erin Hoffmann (Tradia Inc.), Conleth O'Connell (Vignette), Waqar Sadiq (Vitria Technology Inc.), Randy Waldrop (WebMethods), Bill Anderson (Xerox), Tom Breuel (Xerox), Matthew MacKenzie (XMLGlobal Technologies), David Webber (XMLGlobal Technologies), John Evdemon (XMLSolutions) and Kevin Mitchell (XMLSolutions).

The people who have contributed to discussions on xml-dist-app@w3.org are also gratefully acknowledged.

Part 2 Change Log SOAP Specification Changes

Date	Author	Description
20020612	HFN	Removing change log :)
20020612	HFN	Removed appendix C (didn't find any refernces to it)
20020612	HFN	Removed diff markup
20020612	HFN	Updated namespace to "http://www.w3.org/2002/06/..."
20020605	HFN	Added comments on GETF resolution from JJM, MJH, CF, and HFN.
20020605	HFN	Incorporated resolution from GETF.
20020527	MJH	Removed quotes around lexical value.
20020527	MJH	Removed a couple of instances of lower case should and must.
20020527	MJH	Added reference to SOAP part 0.
20020517	JJM	Fixed some typos.
20020517	JJM	HTTP versioning wordsmithing.
20020516	MJH	Worked on examples to show rpc:result usage.
20020516	MJH	Added issue 195 resolution.
20020516	MJH	Added ProcedureNotPresent resolution.
20020516	MJH	Added HTTP versioning resolution.
20020515	MJH	Readability update to description of data model.
20020509	MJH	Added RPC root resolution.
20020509	MJH	Added bib refs to spec cross refs. Fixed some xspecrefs that were empty and so didn't show up in the html. Removed pt1 section numbers from cross references since these are not autogenerated and would be a maintenance headache.
20020506	JJM	Removed double-spaces.
20020506	JJM	Divided the long list in "SOAP RPC and Body" into two separate lists.
20020506	JJM	Fixed a few typos.
20020503	HFN	Changed "faulthint" to "faultreason".
20020503	HFN	Made the order of properties listed in ReqRes MEP tables and removed "local abort" as per "http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002May/0005.html". Also fixed the prefix given that some properties have moved from context to reqres.
20020503	HFN	Removed the sentence "This URI is often abbreviated to the term request-response throughout this specification." as we have already said that the MEP is called "Request-Response". Also, have casing consistent in using the name (was often "request-response").
20020503	HFN	Removed the notion that MEP properties are relative URIs - they are just URIs.
20020503	MJH	Added table cross-references.
20020503	MJH	Added streaming edits to state tables in MEP and HTTP binding.
20020503	JJM	Added a couple of missing "SOAP" to streaming stuff.
20020503	JJM	Added back streaming stuff (with proper XML formatting), after CVS hick-up.
20020502	JJM	Added missing <att>
20020502	MJG	Clarified arraySize BNF
20020502	MJH	Incorporated readability changes into abstract.
20020502	MJH	Incorporated readability changes into section 7.
20020502	MJH	Decapitalised requesting, responding, request, response, message, node and path.
20020502	MJH	Incorporated readability changes into sections 5 and 6.
20020502	MJH	Incorporated readability changes into Section 1.
20020501	HFN	Change SOAP Node to SOAP node
20020501	HFN	Incorporated changes referring first ednote in mail thread in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2002May/0005.html
20020501	HFN	Changed "Message Exchange" and other permutations to "MEP"
20020501	MJH	Fixed dangling xref.
20020430	MJG	Incorporated readability changes into Section 4.
20020430	MJG	Incorporated readability changes into Section 3.
20020430	MJG	Incorporated readability changes into Section 2.
20020426	JJM	Updated member list.
20020426	MJH	Removed SOAPAction section - moved to application/soap+xml ID.
20020425	MJG	Removed notion of local/global scoping from SOAP Encoding per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2002Apr/0024.html
20020425	MJG	Updated on Appendix B1
20020425	MJG	Started on Appendices B2 and B3
20020425	MJH	Completed HTTP status code mapping table (#196).
20020425	MJH	Added resolution for issue #192.
20020425	JJM	Started incorporating resolution for issue #196.
20020424	MJH	Added issue 197 resolution.
20020411	MJH	Fixed responding table in HTTP section.
20020411	MJH	Removed pt1 TOC from intro and cleaned up abstract.
20020410	MJG	Added an id to a div
20020410	MJH	Incorporated Noah's minor comments on intro.
20020410	MJG	Incorporated Noah's minor comments on Sections 2 and 3
20020410	MJG	Amended beginning of type name computation section 3.1.4
20020410	MJG	Amended prose at start of section 3
20020410	MJG	Swapped sections 3.1.4 and 3.1.5
20020410	MJG	Amended description of how to distinguish outbound edges in section 2.1.1
20020410	MJG	Added prose to description of ref/id specifying that ref target must be encoded using soap encoding.
20020410	MJG	Amended description of "struct" in Section 2
20020410	JJM	Added Noah's minor comments on section 4.
20020410	JJM	Added Noah's moderate comments on section 4.
20020410	JJM	Added Noah's most significant comments on section 4.
20020409	MJG	Amended description of "generic" in Section 2
20020409	MJG	Amended the abstract to mention data model, features, MEPs, HTTP binding
20020408	MJG	Clarified that 'node' means 'graph node' in Sections 2 and 3
20020408	MJG	Added bullet about Section 5 and 6 to intro
20020408	MJG	Fixed typos in Section 3
20020404	JJM	Moved the beginning of section "6.0 MEPs" to part1 as "3.2 MEPs". The remaining text (table) from that section is now section "6.1 Property Conventions for MEPs", as suggested by Noah and Henrik.
20020403	MJH	removed duplicate para in section 6.1.3.
20020403	MJH	Updated HTTP binding in line with response to question from TBTF.
20020403	JJM	Amended ednote in 6.1.3, since Stuart has provided text, but not the TBTF.
20020403	MJG	Changed http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap/bindings/defaultHTTP to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap/bindings/HTTP
20020403	JJM	Incorporated the resolution for issue 191, including Henrik's friendly amendments.
20020328	MJH	Worked through HTTP binding. Main changes around formatting of tables, table headings and improving consistency in language.
20020327	JJM	Removed extra spaces around parenthesis, dot, semi-colon and comma.
20020327	JJM	Fixed typo discovered by Herve.
20020322	HFN	Changed mU='1' with mu='true' in examples.
20020322	MJH	replaced transport with context/underlying protocol.
20020322	MJG	Made consistent usage of section names; SOAP Data Model, SOAP Encoding, SOAP RPC Representation, SOAP HTTP Binding
20020322	MJG	Added priority feedback request regarding 'generics' to section 2.3
20020322	MJH	changed all namespace identifiers, URIs to names.
20020322	MJH	removed links in NS URIs.
20020314	MJG	Added appendix B (not yet complete)
20020314	MJG	Rewrote Section 2
20020314	MJG	Rewrote Section 3
20020314	MJG	Amended Section 4 to match new Section 2 and 3
20020321	HFN	Added text to to clarify that HTTP binding is optional and one of many possible bindings
20020321	HFN	Made abstract and introduction consistent with Part 1
20020321	MJH	Issue 174 changes.
20020321	MJH	Made URI styling consistent throughout and consistent with part 1.
20020321	MJH	Made references to fault code values consistent throughout and consistent with part 1.
20020320	JJM	Incorporated resolution for issue #180.
20020320	JJM	Updated cross-references from saying "bibref" "xspecref" to "bibref" section "xspecref". Otherwise the generated HTML looked funny (the links were back to back) [Ednote issue #33]
20020320	JJM	More generally, made all "bibrefs" more uniform.
20020320	JJM	Added resolution text for issue 184.
20020319	JJM	Incorporated Chris Ferris' proposed resolution to 6.1.4 Fault Handling in anticipation of its acceptance by the WG
20020318	JJM	Incorporated resolution to ednote part 2 sec 6.1.3
20020316	HFN	Updated section
20020316	HFN	Updated section
20020316	HFN	Deleted section 6.1.5, 6.1.6, and 7.4.1.3
20020312	MJH	Incorporated issue 16 resolution.
20020312	MJH	Incorporated issue 113 resolution.
20020312	MJH	Incorporated issue 48 resolution.
20020312	MJH	Fixed up content list of part 1 in introduction.
20020305	MJG	Removed section 1.3 ( Terminology)
20020305	MJG	Removed section 1.2 ( Examples)
20020304	HFN	Updated rule 8 as per resolution to issue 177. Section on default values seemed already to have been removed.
20020304	HFN	Removed last two paragraphs in section "RPC and SOAP Header" talking about non-normative example text
20020228	HFN	Updated abstract slightly
20020228	HFN	Add security considerations text.
20020228	HFN	Added second part of resolution of issue 59: Say that we mandate support for UTF-8 and UTF-16
20020228	HFN	Move the HTTP specific examples in Appendix B1 to Appendix C.
20020227	MJG	Changed all refs to transport message exchange to message exchange
20020227	MJG	Moved ednote from 6.1.3 to be text in 6
20020225	MJG	Removed reference to 'Simple Authentication Feature' in HTTP binding
20020225	MJG	added id attrs to all div elements
20020225	MJG	Removed section 7.5.2
20020225	MJG	Removed redundant text from 3.1.2
20020221	MJG	Edited examples so that no line is longer than 66 characters
20020220	MJG	Moved SOAP HTTP Examples to an appendix marked as non-normative
20020220	MJG	Added text stating the paragraph on transaction ids in Section 4.2 is non-normative
20020219	MJG	Changed BNF for arraySize to say non negative integer instead of positive integer
20020219	MJG	Changed arraySize to use nonNegativeInteger instead of positiveInteger
20020215	MJG	Removed old array attributes from encoding schema
20020215	MJG	Added new array attributes to encoding schema
20020215	MJG	Rewrote Section 3 from XML Infoset perspective
20020214	MJG	Removed NOTATION type and element decl from encoding schema
20020214	MJG	Rolled back Infoset rewrite of RPC section
20020214	MJG	Changed relevant occurrences of Client and Server to Sender and Receiver for consistency with Part 1.
20020213	MJH	Removed (possibly defaulted) from encoding rule 2.
20020213	MJH	Changed encoding examples to better show inline multirefs and removed corresponding ednote.
20020208	MJG	Added examples to Appendix A
20020208	MJG	Changed Section 4.1 ednote
20020208	MJG	Rewrote Section 4.1 from Infoset perspective
20020201	MJH	Editorial fix to encoding array example narrative.
20020131	MJH	Added new "Decoding faults" subsection as resolution for issues 168 and 170.
20020129	MJH	Pulled out the single/multi ref descriptions in Simple Types/Strings and Simple Types/Array of Bytes into a new separate subsection of the Simple Types section.
20020129	MJH	Misc editorial fixes.
20020129	MJH	Fixed EBNF reference to use XML Recommendation notation.
20020129	MJH	Fixed reference to SOAP media type draft, removed duplicated information, renumbered following references.
20020125	HFN	In section on SOAP data model, changed "The SOAP data model represents information as a graph of typed objects" to "The SOAP data model represents information as a graph of typed nodes"
20020125	HFN	Removed ednote in section 7.1 regarding SOAP media type and added reference to the soap media type internet draft for details about use of media type parameters. I have not changed the use of SOAPAction during this.
20020121	MJH	Changed encoding references from anyURI to IDREF (Issue 170).
20020118	MJH	Changed rpc error text to use new SOAP fault subcodes (Issue 173).
20020117	MJH	Fixed indentation on more examples.
20020117	MJH	Removed sparse and partially transmitted arrays. Modified encoding section to use arraySize and itemType attributes. Resolves issues 117, 144 and 161.
20020117	JJM	Added text for resolution of issue 12.
20020114	MJH	Fixed indentation in 3 of the examples in SOAP encoding section.
20020114	MJH	Removed duplicate text for section 2 (SOAP Data Model) from section 3 (SOAP Encoding).
20020109	JJM	Incorporated comments from John Ibbotson.
20011220	JJM	Added resolution for 171 in section 4.1 "Rules for Encoding Types in XML".
20011219	JJM	Fixed abstract.
20011214	JJM	Fixed incorrect reference to XML Protocol Charter.
20011214	JJM	Fixed incorrect combination of olist, item and p in "A Mapping Application Defined Name to XML Name" section
20011214	JJM	Fixed incorrect reference to XLink.
20011213	JJM	Changed the namespace to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/.
20011211	JJM	In the new TBTF sections, use the passive voice instead of "we".
20011211	JJM	Replace application/soap+xml by application/soap in "HTTP Request Fields" table.
20011211	JJM	Replace text/xml by application/soap in "Responding State" table.
20011211	JJM	Fixed typo in section 6 noticed by Mario.
20011210	JJM	Incorporated David's editorial changes to section 6.
20011206	JJM	Fixes to occurrences of texting referring to blocks (instead of body elements).
20011206	JJM	Converted all the tables in sections 7 and 8 into proper XML.
20011206	JJM	Moved HTTP examples from old binding section to new binding section.
20011206	JJM	Replaced SOAPAction production rules in new binding section with that from old binding section (they were identical, but formatting was better).
20011206	JJM	Removed old binding section.
20011206	JJM	Updated references to XLink and XML Infoset (now recommendations).
20011206	JJM	Moved text about application/soap from old binding to new binding section.
20011206	JJM	Transformed references into proper hyperlinks.
20011206	JJM	Changed image format to GIF.
20011206	JJM	Reduced image size.
20011205	JJM	Incorporated TBTF Part 2 (Features).
20011205	JJM	Incorporated TBTF Part 3 (MEPs).
20011205	JJM	Incorporated TBTF Part 4 (HTTP Binding). There are still some HTML-icisms. Hopefully, they will go away after today's conference call.
20011204	MJH	Changes to encoding section - issue 18.
20011204	MJH	Updated DTD and appendix A to preserve subscripts in variable elements.
20011204	MJH	Updated reference to RFC2376 to RFC3023.
20011204	JJM	Updated the ednote for SOAPAction as an optional feature, now that this is defined in section 5..
20011204	JJM	Added quotes around "Required-SOAPAction".
20011129	MJG	Fixed ednote related to change from text/xml to application/soap
20011122	MJH	Removed placeholder and ednote for HTTP extension framework. The actual text of the section was removed prior to the previous draft and replaced with an ednote requesting feedback on the removal. As none was received the subsection has now been completely removed along with the corresponding bibliography entry.
20011121	MJH	Added appendix for mapping application names to XML element names. Added cross references to encoding and RPC sections to point readers to the new appendix. (Issue 1)
20011029	MJH	Added text to state that SOAP is no longer an acronym (Issue 125)
20011029	MJH	Amended introductory text (Issue 148)
20011029	MJH	Amended introductory text (Issue 147)
20011029	MJH	Amended abstract (Issue 147)
20011026	MJG	Amended BNF for arrayTypeValue to use form from XML 1.0 Rec (Issue 162)
20011026	MJG	Amended prose related to DTDs and PIs (Issue 4)
20011026	MJG	Updated schema change table to list change from ur-type to anyType
20011026	MJG	Added xml declaration to all XML examples with a root of env:Envelope or xs:schema
20011024	MJG	Changed media type from text/xml to application/soap and added associated ednote
20010926	MJG	Updated member list
20010926	MJG	Updated ednote in section 6.4
20010926	MJG	Changed rpc namespace to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-rpc
20010921	MJG	Added rpc namespace to list in Section 2
20010921	MJG	Added new schema for rpc result element as described in section 5.1
20010921	MJG	Amended section 5.1 to incorporate description of rpc result element
20010921	MJG	Changed targetNamespace attribute of encoding schema to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-encoding
20010921	JJM	Used text proposed by Noah for ednote on SOAPAction.
20010920	JJM	Make the wording clarification regarding issue 45 (decreasing order of precedence).
20010920	JJM	Removed current security section; added new security subsection to HTTP binding section, with a temporary ednote until we get text from Henrik and Chris).
20010920	JJM	Change the namespace of the envelope to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/...
20010920	JJM	Add an editorial note about why some sections are not written in terms of infoset.
20010920	JJM	Add ednote from Jacek regarding SOAPAction.
20010918	JJM	Added ednote to the "SOAPAction" section indicating that a HTTP status code needs to be obtained from IANA.
20010918	JJM	Removed last electrocommerce.org URL from examples.
20010914	JJM	Added text from Henrik to beef-up the "Data Model" section placeholder text.
20010914	JJM	Back to "Adjuncts" again.
20010914	JJM	Fixed issues 124, 126, 127, 128 and 132.
20010914	JJM	Fixed typos and indentation.
20010914	JJM	Reference the XML InfoSet Proposed Recommendation instead of the Candidate Recommendation.
20010911	JJM	Changed XML Information Set into a normative reference. Changed XML Protocol Comments Archive, Discussion Archive and Charter into non-normative references. Added a reference to RFC2396 in section 4, 3rd paragraph.
20010905	MJH	Wordsmithed abstract and introduction to better reflect split into parts 1 and 2. Rationalised list of references so only cited works appear. Removed envelope schema changes. Added bibref entries for cross references to Part 1, fixed links so they target the HTML instead of XML version of the doc.
20010831	JJM	Added a close paragraph tag before starting a new olist or ulist.
20010831	JJM	Properly declared the language for the spec, so that we can generate valid HTML.
20010831	JJM	Added text from Hugo to emphasize the fact that the SOAP root attribute is of type XML Schema boolean.
20010830	MJG	Copied "Relation to XML" section from part 1.
20010830	MJG	Removed Design Goals section (design goals listed relevant to Part 1 not Part 2)
20010830	JJM	Removed terminology not relevant to part2.
20010830	JJM	Added SOAP examples from part 1, introductory sections.
20010830	JJM	Added SOAP example appendix from part1.
20010830	JJM	Added a paragraph to section 1 pointing to part2 for encoding, rpc and http binding.
20010830	JJM	Added a paragraph at the beginning of section 3 to cover serializations containing references to data outside the serialization, as per 20010829 teleconference.
20010830	JJM	Remove 2nd sentence, bullet 5, RPC faults section, as per 20010829 teleconference.
20010830	JJM	Remove 2nd sentence, bullet 1, RPC faults section, as per 20010822 teleconference.
20010829	JJM	Added a placeholder for the forthcoming Data Model section.
20010829	JJM	Removed the Envelope Example section, already present in part1.
20010829	JJM	Updated the specs title.
20010829	JJM	Replaced specref with xspecref for references to Part1 items.
20010829	JJM	Added bibliography entry for SOAP 1.2 Part 1.
20010829	JJM	Removed former sections 1, 2, 3 and 4, and the SOAP versioning appendix. Moved the RPC section before the HTTP binding section, as per the 20010815 teleconference call.
20010829	JJM	Did split the spec into two parts.
20010829	JJM	Referred to the proper DTD and stylesheet.
20010829	JJM	Updated the list of WG members: one person per line in the XML file, for easier updating.
20010816	MJH	Replaced a mustUnderstand="1" with mustUnderstand="true". Slight rewording in mu description.
20010810	MJH	Merged in RPC fault rules text from Jacek. Added new DataEncodingUnknown fault code to SOAP Fault Codes section. Added editorial notes about introduction of new fault code namespace for RPC.
20010809	MJH	Merged in "mustHappen" descriptive text from Glen and Noah.
20010809	MJH	Fixed language around "default" values of attributes.
20010809	MJH	Removed HTTP extension framework, added editorial note to describe why.
20010808	MJH	Added Infoset "specified" property text from Chris.
20010808	MJH	Removed assumption 4 from version transition appendix.
20010808	MJH	Added reference to SOAP 1.1 specification to references section, removed SOAP 1.1 author list from acknowledgments section.
20010807	MJH	Converted specification from HTML to XML conforming to W3C XMLSpec DTD. Numerous resulting formatting changes.
20010720	MJG	Applied Infoset terminology to sections 1, 2, 3 and 4.
20010629	MJG	Amended description of routing and intermediaries in Section 2.1
20010629	JJM	Changed "latest version" URI to end with soap12
20010629	JJM	Remove "previous version" URI
20010629	JJM	Removed "Editor copy" in <title>
20010629	JJM	Removed "Editor copy" in the title.
20010629	JJM	Added "Previous version" to either point to SOAP/1.1, or explicitly mention there was no prior draft.
20010629	JJM	Pre-filed publication URIs.
20010629	JJM	Incorporated Davids suggested changes for the examples in section 4.1.1 to 4.4.2
20010629	JJM	Fixed some remaining typos.
20010629	MJH	Fixed a couple of typos.
20010628	MJG	Made various formatting, spelling and grammatical fixes.
20010628	MJG	Moved soap:encodingStyle from soap:Envelope to children of soap:Header/soap:Body in examples 1, 2, 47, 48, 49 and 50
20010628	MJG	Changed text in Section 2.1 from "it is both a SOAP sender or a SOAP receiver" to "it is both a SOAP sender and a SOAP receiver"
20010628	MJG	Fixed caption on Example 24
20010628	MJH	Fixed a couple of capitalisation errors where the letter A appeared as a capital in the middle of a sentence.
20010628	MJH	Updated figure 1, removed ednote to do so.
20010622	HFN	Removed the introductory text in terminology section 1.4.3 as it talks about model stuff that is covered in section 2. It was left over from original glossary which also explained the SOAP model.
20010622	HFN	Moved the definition of block to encapsulation section in terminology
20010622	HFN	Removed introductory section in 1.4.1 as this overlaps with the model description in section 2 and does not belong in a terminology section
20010622	HFN	Removed reference to "Web Characterization Terminology & Definitions Sheet" in terminology section as this is not an active WD
20010622	HFN	Added revised glossary
20010622	HFN	Added example 0 to section 1.3 and slightly modified text for example 1 and 2 to make it clear that HTTP is used as a protocol binding
20010622	MJG	Added http://example.com/... to list of application/context specific URIs in section 1.2
20010622	MJG	Updated examples in section 4.1.1 to be encodingStyle attributes rather than just the values of attributes
20010622	MJG	Added table.norm, td.normitem and td.normtext styles to stylesheet. Used said styles for table of fault code values in section 4.4.1
20010622	MJG	In Appendix C, changed upgrade element to Upgrade and env to envelope. Made envelope unqualified. Updated schema document to match.
20010622	MJG	Moved MisunderstoodHeader from envelope schema into separate faults schema. Removed entry in envelope schema change table in Appendix D.2 that referred to addition of said element. Modified example in section 4.4.2 to match. Added reference to schema document to section 4.4.2
20010622	MJH	Added binding as a component of SOAP in introduction. Fixed a couple of typos and updated a couple of example captions.
20010622	MJG	Made BNF in section 6.1.1 into a table.
20010622	MJG	Made BNFs in section 5.1 clause 8 into tables. Added associated 'bnf' style for table and td elements to stylesheet
20010622	MJG	Amended text regarding namespace prefix mappings in section 1.2
20010622	MJG	Added link to schema for the http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-upgrade namespace to Appendix C. Updated associated ednote.
20010622	MJG	Added reference numbers for XML Schema Recommendation to text prior to schema change tables in Appendix D.2 and linked said numbers to local references in this document
20010622	MJG	Reordered entries in schema change classification table in Appendix D.2
20010622	MJG	Changed type of mustUnderstand and root attributes to standard boolean and updated schema change tables in Appendix D.2 accordingly
20010622	JJM	Manually numbered all the examples (53 in total!)
20010622	JJM	Added caption text to all the examples
20010622	JJM	Replaced remaining occurrences of SOAP/1.2 with SOAP Version 1.2 (including <title>)
20010621	HFN	Added ednote to section 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 that we know they have to be incorporated with section 2
20010621	HFN	Added version transition appendix C
20010621	HFN	Applied new styles to examples
20010621	HFN	Changed term "transport" to "underlying protocol"
20010621	HFN	Changed example URNs to URLs of the style http://example.org/...
20010621	MJH	Updated the Acknowledgements section.
20010621	JJM	Added new style sheet definitions (from XML Schema) for examples, and used them for example 1 and 2.
20010621	JJM	Incorporated David Fallsides comments on section Status and Intro sections.
20010620	HFN	Changed the status section
20010620	HFN	Changed title to SOAP Version 1.2 and used that first time in abstract and in body
20010620	HFN	Removed question from section 2.4 as this is an issue and is to be listed in the issues list
20010620	HFN	Moved change log to appendix
20010615	JJM	Renamed default actor to anonymous actor for now (to be consistent)
20010615	JJM	Fixed typos in section 2
20010614	JJM	Updated section 2 to adopt the terminology used elsewhere in the spec.
20010613	MJH	Updated mustUnderstand fault text with additions from Martin Gudgin.
20010613	MJH	Added schema changes appendix from Martin Gudgin.
20010613	MJH	Added mustUnderstand fault text from Glen Daniels.
20010612	MJH	Fixed document <title>.
20010612	MJH	Moved terminology subsection from message exchange model section to introduction section.
20010612	MJH	Fixed capitalisation errors by replacing "... A SOAP ..." with "... a SOAP ..." where appropriate.
20010612	MJH	Removed trailing "/" from encoding namespace URI.
20010612	MJH	Fixed links under namespace URIs to point to W3C space instead of schemas.xmlsoap.org.
20010612	MJH	Removed some odd additional links with text of "/" pointing to the encoding schema following the text of the encoding namespace URI in several places.
20010611	MJH	Incorporated new text for section 2.
20010611	JJM	Changed remaining namespaces, in particular next.
20010609	JJM	Changed the spec name from XMLP/SOAP to SOAP.
20010609	JJM	Changed the version number from 1.1 to 1.2.
20010609	JJM	Changed the namespaces from http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/ to http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-.
20010609	JJM	Replaced the remaining XS and XE prefixes to env and enc, respectively.
20010601	MJH	Updated the examples in section 1, 6 and appendix A with text suggested by Martin Gudgin to comply with XML Schema Recommendation.
20010601	JJM	Updated the examples in section 4 and 5 with text suggested by Martin Gudgin, to comply with XML Schema Recommendation.
20010531	HFN	Removed appendices C and D and added links to live issues list and separate schema files.
20010531	MJH	Added this change log and updated schemas in appendix C to comply with XML Schema Recommendation.

XML Schema Changes

The encoding schema has been updated to be compliant with the XML Schema Recomendation. The table below shows the categories of change.

Schema Change Categorisation
Class	Meaning
Addition	New constructs have been added to the schema
Clarification	The meaning of the schema has been changed to more accurately match the specification
Change	The schema has been changed due to a change in the specification
Deletion	Constructs have been removed from the schema
Name	The schema has been changed due to a datatype name change in the XML Schema specification
Namespace	A namespace name has been changed
Semantic	The meaning of the schema has been changed
Style	Style changes have been made to the schema
Syntax	The syntax of the schema has been updated due to changes in the XML Schema specification

The table below lists the changes to the encoding schema.

Changes to Encoding Schema
Class	Description
Namespace	Updated to use the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace
Namespace	Value of targetNamespace attribute changed to http://www.w3.org/2001/06/soap-encoding
Semantic	Changed type of the root attribute from restriction of boolean that only allowed 0 or 1 as lexical values to the standard boolean in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace. The lexical forms 0, 1, false, true are now allowed.
Addition	Added processContents="lax" to all element and attribute wildcards
Syntax	Changed base64 simple type to be a vacuous restriction of the base64Binary type in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace
Syntax	Updated all complex type definitions with simple base types to new syntax
Syntax	Added <xs:sequence> to all complex type definitions derived implicitly from the ur-type
Syntax	Added <xs:sequence> to all named model group definitions
Deletion	Removed the timeDuration datatype
Addition	Added duration datatype derived by extension from the duration datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Deletion	Removed the timeInstant datatype
Addition	Added dateTime datatype derived by extension from the dateTime datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added gYearMonth datatype derived by extension from the gYearMonth datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added gYear datatype derived by extension from the gYear datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added gMonthDay datatype derived by extension from the gMonthDay datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added gDay datatype derived by extension from the gDay datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added gDay datatype derived by extension from the gDay datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Deletion	Removed the binary datatype
Addition	Added hexBinary datatype derived by extension from the hexBinary datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added base64Binary datatype derived by extension from the base64Binary datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Deletion	Removed the uriReference datatype
Addition	Added anyURI datatype derived by extension from the anyURI datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added normalizedString datatype derived by extension from the normalizedString datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Addition	Added token datatype derived by extension from the token datatype in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace.
Clarification	Added explicit namespace="##any" to all element and attribute wildcards which did not previously have an explicit namespace attribute
Style	Where possible comments have been changed into annotations
Addition	Added element declaration for anyType
Deletion	Removed the ur-type element declaration and complexType definition
Deletion	Removed the NOTATION element declaration and complexType definition
Deletion	Removed global attribute declarations for attributes associated with sparse arrays.
Addition	Added arraySize global attribute decl and associated type definitions
Addition	Added itemType global attribute decl
Change	Amended arrayAttribute attribute group removing sparse array attributes and adding arraySize and itemType attributes.
Change	Changed arraySize type to allow nonNegativeIntegers instead of positiveIntegers