OASIS ebXML Messaging Services TC

 View Only

Re: [ebxml-msg] Discussion: payload reference for use in SOAP body.Survey of options before writing this up.

  • 1.  Re: [ebxml-msg] Discussion: payload reference for use in SOAP body.Survey of options before writing this up.

    Posted 05-20-2004 15:51
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    ebxml-msg message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Discussion: payload reference for use in SOAP body.Survey of options before writing this up.


    So, something like the following may be a good idea..:

    cid:<soapBody | attachmentID>[#XPath]

    Producing the following valid URIs...

    cid:attachment1
    cid:attachment1#/ContainerElement/Invoice[0]
    cid:soapBody
    cid:soapBody#/Invoice[0]

    The only problem I see is with namespaces and XPath. I'm not sure if there is an interoperable way to deal with XPath and namespaces. In the past, I've had to register prefix mappings with the XPath engine. Consider:

    <SOAP:Body>
    <Invoice xmlns="urn:typeA" />
    <Invoice xmlns="urn:typeB" />
    </SOAP:Body>

    How do I point at a typeB invoice?

    -matt

    On May 20, 2004, at 12:44 PM, Dale Moberg wrote:

    Using CID URL-References would have the advantage of being definite about which "document" is the one to look for the ID value.
    That seems worth the added trouble. Supporting CIDs is something ebXML MSHes will have to do anyway when using sWa.

    Also, having an "absolute" URI-Ref seems better than a "relative" one (which just means we create a problem of figuring out the base).
    It means that "content-id" header must be used (which means the SOAP processor needs to�interact with�the MIME packager�and�coordinate�
    the value for content-id).

    The other question I have�is whether we should also allow some of the scheme-based pointers. That could have at least 2
    advantages that I see:

    1. We don't have to worry about using a schema to find out the ID type for attributes' values.
    2. We wouldn't have to add attributes to elements just to pick out what is referred to.

    A�disadvantage is�the added complexity of having another way to do something.