Copyright © 2001 W3C® (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use, and software licensing rules apply.
SOAP version 1.2 is a lightweight protocol for exchange of information in a decentralized, distributed environment. It is an XML based protocol at the core of which is an envelope that defines a framework for describing what is in a message and how to process it and a transport binding framework for exchanging messages using an underlying protocol. Adjuncts to the envelope and binding framework include a set of encoding rules for expressing instances of application-defined data types and a convention for representing remote procedure calls and responses. Part 1 (this document) describes the SOAP envelope and SOAP transport binding framework; Part 2[1]describes adjuncts to the envelope and binding 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 third 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.
For a detailed list of changes since the last publication of this document, refer to appendix C Part 1 Change Log. 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[13]). It is inappropriate to send discussion emails to this address.
Discussion of this document takes place on the public xml-dist-app@w3.org mailing list[14] per the email communication rules in the XML Protocol Working Group Charter[15].
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/.
1 Introduction
1.1 Design Goals
1.2 Notational Conventions
1.3 Example of SOAP Message
1.4 SOAP Terminology
1.4.1 Protocol Concepts
1.4.2 Data Encapsulation Concepts
1.4.3 Message Sender and Receiver Concepts
2 SOAP Message Exchange Model
2.1 SOAP Nodes
2.2 SOAP Actors and SOAP Nodes
2.3 Targeting SOAP Header Blocks
2.4 Understanding SOAP Headers
2.5 Structure and Interpretation of SOAP Bodies
2.6 Processing SOAP Messages
3 Relation to XML
4 SOAP Envelope
4.1 Envelope Encoding and Versioning
4.1.1 SOAP encodingStyle Attribute
4.1.2 Envelope Versioning Model
4.2 SOAP Header
4.2.1 Use of Header Attributes
4.2.2 SOAP actor Attribute
4.2.3 SOAP mustUnderstand Attribute
4.3 SOAP Body
4.4 SOAP Fault
4.4.1 SOAP faultcode Element
4.4.2 SOAP faultstring Element
4.4.3 SOAP faultactor Element
4.4.4 SOAP detail Element
4.4.5 SOAP Fault Codes
4.4.6 MustUnderstand Faults
5 SOAP Protocol Binding Framework
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Goals of the Binding Framework
5.3 Binding Framework
5.4 Binding to Application-Specific Protocols
5.5 Security Considerations
6 Use of URIs in SOAP
7 References
7.1 Normative References
7.2 Informative References
A Version Transition From SOAP/1.1 to SOAP Version 1.2
B Acknowledgements (Non-Normative)
C Part 1 Change Log (Non-Normative)
C.1 SOAP Specification Changes
C.2 XML Schema Changes
SOAP version 1.2 provides a simple and lightweight mechanism for exchanging structured and typed information between peers in a decentralized, distributed environment using XML. SOAP does not itself define any application semantics such as a programming model or implementation specific semantics; rather it defines a simple mechanism for expressing application semantics by providing a modular packaging model and mechanisms for encoding application defined data. This allows SOAP to be used for a large variety of purposes ranging from messaging systems to remote procedure call (RPC) invocations. In previous versions of this specification the SOAP name was an acronym. This is no longer the case.
Part 1 of the SOAP specification (this document) describes:
The SOAP envelope (4 SOAP Envelope). This construct defines an overall framework for expressing what is in a message, who should deal with it, and whether it is optional or mandatory.
The SOAP binding framework (5 SOAP Protocol Binding Framework). This defines an abstract framework for exchanging SOAP envelopes between peers using an underlying protocol for transport. The SOAP HTTP binding [1](SOAP in HTTP) defines a concrete instance of a binding to the HTTP protocol[2].
Part 2[1] describes adjuncts to the envelope and binding framework including the SOAP encoding rules [1](SOAP Encoding) that define a serialization mechanism that can be used to exchange instances of application-defined datatypes and the SOAP RPC representation [1]( SOAP for RPC) that defines a convention that can be used to represent remote procedure calls and responses.
Two major design goals for SOAP are simplicity and extensibility. SOAP attempts to meet these goals by omitting features often found in messaging systems and distributed object systems such as:
distributed garbage collection;
boxcarring or batching of messages;
objects-by-reference (which requires distributed garbage collection);
activation (which requires objects-by-reference).
Note that it is possible to implement such features using SOAP but they are out of scope for this specification.
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 [3].
The namespace prefixes "env" and "enc" used in the prose sections of this document are associated with the SOAP namespace names "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope" and "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding" respectively.
The namespace prefixes "xs" and "xsi" used in the prose sections of this document are associated with the namespace names "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" and "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" respectively, both of which are defined in the XML Schemas specification[4],[5].
Note that the choice of any namespace prefix is arbitrary and not semantically significant.
Namespace URIs of the general form "http://example.org/..." and "http://example.com/..." represent an application-dependent or context-dependent URI[6].
The following example shows a simple notification message
expressed in SOAP. The message contains a header block
alertcontrol
and the body alert
both of which are application defined and not defined by
SOAP. The header contains information which may be of
use to intermediaries as
well as the ultimate destination of the message. The body
contains the actual notification message to be
delivered.
<?xml version="1.0" ?> <env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope"> <env:Header> <n:alertcontrol xmlns:n="http://example.org/alertcontrol"> <n:priority>1</n:priority> <n:expires>2001-06-22T14:00:00-05:00</n:expires> </n:alertcontrol> </env:Header> <env:Body> <m:alert xmlns:m="http://example.org/alert"> <m:msg>Pick up Mary at school at 2pm</m:msg> </m:alert> </env:Body> </env:Envelope>
The formal set of conventions governing the format and processing rules of a SOAP message and basic control of interaction between SOAP nodes generating and accepting SOAP messages for the purpose of exchanging information along a SOAP message path.
The formal set of rules for carrying a SOAP message within or on top of another protocol (underlying protocol) for the purpose of transmission. Example SOAP bindings include carrying a SOAP message within an HTTP entity-body, or over a TCP stream.
A SOAP node processes a SOAP message according to the formal set of conventions defined by SOAP. The SOAP node is responsible for enforcing the rules that govern the exchange of SOAP messages and accesses the services provided by the underlying protocols through SOAP bindings. Non-compliance with SOAP conventions can cause a SOAP node to generate a SOAP fault (see also SOAP receiver and SOAP sender).
A SOAP message is the basic unit of communication between peer SOAP nodes.
The outermost syntactic construct or structure of a SOAP message defined by SOAP within which all other syntactic elements of the message are enclosed.
A syntactic construct
or structure used to delimit data that logically
constitutes a single computational unit within the SOAP
header. SOAP header blocks are direct children of the SOAP
Header
(4.2 SOAP Header)
element information
item. The type of a SOAP header block is identified by
the fully qualified name of the outer element
information item of the
block, which consists of its namespace URI and local
name.
A collection of zero or more SOAP header blocks each of which may be targeted at any SOAP receiver within the SOAP message path.
A collection of zero or more element information items targeted at the ultimate SOAP receiver in the SOAP message path.
A special SOAP element information item which contains fault information generated by a SOAP node.
The following diagram illustrates how a SOAP message is composed.
A SOAP sender is a SOAP node that transmits a SOAP message.
A SOAP receiver is a SOAP node that accepts a SOAP message.
The set of SOAP senders and SOAP receivers through which a single SOAP message passes. This includes the initial SOAP sender, zero or more SOAP intermediaries, and the ultimate SOAP receiver.
The SOAP sender that originates a SOAP message as the starting point of a SOAP message path.
A SOAP intermediary is both a SOAP receiver and a SOAP sender and is target-able from within a SOAP message. It processes a defined set of blocks in a SOAP message along a SOAP message path. It acts in order to forward the SOAP message towards the ultimate SOAP receiver.
The SOAP receiver that the initial sender specifies as the final destination of the SOAP message within a SOAP message path. A SOAP message may not reach the ultimate recipient because of a SOAP fault generated by a SOAP node along the SOAP message path.
A software entity that produces, consumes or otherwise acts upon SOAP messages in a manner conforming to the SOAP processing model
SOAP messages are fundamentally one-way transmissions from a SOAP sender to a SOAP receiver; however, SOAP messages are often combined to implement patterns such as request/response.
SOAP implementations can be optimized to exploit the unique characteristics of particular network systems. For example, the HTTP binding described in [1](SOAP in HTTP) provides for SOAP response messages to be delivered as HTTP responses, using the same connection as the inbound request.
A SOAP node can be the initial SOAP sender, the ultimate SOAP receiver, or a SOAP intermediary, in which case it is both a SOAP sender and a SOAP receiver. SOAP does not provide a routing mechanism, however SOAP does recognise that a SOAP sender originates a SOAP message which is sent to an ultimate SOAP receiver, via zero or more SOAP intermediaries.
A SOAP node receiving a SOAP message MUST perform processing according to the SOAP processing model as described in this section and, if appropriate, generate SOAP faults, SOAP responses and send additional SOAP messages, as provided by the remainder of this specification.
In processing a SOAP message, a SOAP node is said to act in the role of one or more SOAP actors, each of which is identified by a URI known as the SOAP actor name. Each SOAP node MUST act in the role of the special SOAP actor named "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope/actor/next", and can additionally assume the roles of zero or more other SOAP actors. A SOAP node can establish itself as the ultimate SOAP receiver by acting in the (additional) role of the anonymous SOAP actor. The roles assumed MUST be invariant during the processing of an individual SOAP message; because this specification deals only with the processing of individual SOAP messages, no statement is made regarding the possibility that a given piece of software might or might not act in varying roles when processing more than one SOAP message.
SOAP nodes MUST NOT act in the role of the special SOAP actor named "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope/actor/none". Header blocks targeted to this special actor are carried with the message to the ultimate receiver, but are never formally "processed". Such blocks MAY carry data that is required for processing of other blocks.
While the purpose of a SOAP actor name is to identify a SOAP node, there are no routing or message exchange semantics associated with the SOAP actor name. For example, SOAP Actors MAY be named with a URI useable to route SOAP messages to an appropriate SOAP node. Conversely, it is also appropriate to use SOAP actor roles with names that are related more indirectly to message routing (e.g. "http://example.org/banking/anyAccountMgr") or which are unrelated to routing (e.g. a URI meant to identify "all cache management software"; such a header might be used, for example, to carry an indication to any concerned software that the containing SOAP message is idempotent, and can safely be cached and replayed.)
Except for "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope/actor/next", "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope/actor/none" and the anonymous actor this specification does not prescribe the criteria by which a given node determines the (possible empty) set of roles in which it acts on a given message. For example, implementations can base this determination on factors including, but not limited to: hardcoded choices in the implementation, information provided by the transport binding (e.g. the URI to which the message was physically delivered), configuration information made by users during system installation, etc.
SOAP header blocks carry optional actor
attribute
information items (see
4.2.2 SOAP actor Attribute) that are used to target them to
the appropriate SOAP node(s). SOAP header blocks with no
such attribute information item are implicitly
targeted at the anonymous SOAP actor,
implying that they are to be processed by the ultimate SOAP
receiver. This specification refers to the (implicit or
explicit) value of
the SOAP actor
attribute as the SOAP actor for
the
corresponding SOAP header block.
A SOAP header block is said to be targeted to a SOAP node if the
SOAP actor
(if present) on the block matches
(see [7]) a role played by the SOAP node, or in the
case of a SOAP header block with no actor
attribute
information item, if the
SOAP node is acting in the role of the ultimate SOAP receiver.
A SOAP Node that acts in the role of the anonymous actor with respect to a particular SOAP message becomes the ultimate recipient of that SOAP message. Such a SOAP node is responsible for processing all parts of the message intended for the anonymous actor, including the body, according to the rules described in this section. The SOAP message path for that message ends at the ultimate recipient. However, the ultimate recipient may delegate all or part of its responsibility to other entities. The ultimate recipient may happen to use distinct SOAP message exchanges to interact with such entities. Nevertheless, responsibility for the processing of parts of a SOAP message targetted at the anonymous actor rests with the ultimate recipient of that message
It is likely that specifications for a wide variety of header functions will be developed over time, and that some SOAP nodes MAY include the software necessary to implement one or more such extensions. A SOAP header block is said to be understood by a SOAP node if the software at that SOAP node has been written to fully conform to and implement the semantics conveyed by the combination of local name and namespace name of the outer-most element information item of that block.
SOAP header blocks carry optional
mustUnderstand
attribute
information items (see
4.2.3 SOAP mustUnderstand Attribute). When the value of such an
attribute information item is
"true" or "1",
the SOAP block is said to be mandatory.
For every mandatory SOAP header block targeted to a node, that node MUST either process the block according to the semantics conveyed by the combination of local name and namespace name of the outer-most element information item of that block; or not process the SOAP message at all, and instead generate a fault (see 2.6 Processing SOAP Messages and 4.4 SOAP Fault).
Mandatory blocks MUST be presumed to somehow modify the semantics of other headers or body elements. Tagging SOAP blocks as mandatory thus assures that such changes in semantics will not be silently (and, presumably, erroneously) ignored.
The mustUnderstand
attribute information
item is not intended as a mechanism for
detecting errors in routing, misidentification of nodes,
failure of a node to serve in its intended role(s), etc.,
any of which may result in a failure to even attempt processing,
and the subsequent removal, of a given SOAP header block from
a SOAP envelope.
This specification therefore does not require any fault to be
generated based on the presence or value of this attribute
on a SOAP header block not targeted at the current
processing node, for example when it is suspected that
such a block has survived erronously due to a routing
or targeting error at a preceeding intermediairy. In particular,
it is not an error for a mandatory header block targeted to
a role other than the ones assumed by the ultimate SOAP
receiver to reach
that node without having been processed.
A SOAP body consists of zero or more namespace qualified
element information items, which are the
immediate children
of the Body
element information item.
The ultimate SOAP receiver MUST correctly process such body elements.
However, Part 1 of this specification (this document)
mandates no particular structure
or interpretation
of such elements, and provides no standard means for specifying
the processing to be done.
When multiple body elements are present, such elements MAY represent a single unit of work to be performed, MAY represent multiple separate processing steps, possibly but not necessarily in order, MAY represent data or metadata, MAY convey a mixture of work units and data, etc. The ultimate SOAP recipient MAY use the local name(s) and namespace name(s), on any or all body elements, to determine the processing to be performed. Indeed, the SOAP RPC convention (see [1]Using SOAP for RPC) uses just such a method. Conversely, other information in the body and/or headers MAY be used to make such a determination.
This section sets out the rules by which SOAP messages are processed. Unless otherwise stated, processing must be semantically equivalent to performing the following steps separately, and in the order given. Note however that nothing in this specification should be taken to prevent the use of optimistic concurrency, roll back, or other techniques that might provide increased flexibility in processing order as long as all SOAP messages, SOAP faults and application-level side effects are equivalent to those that would be obtained by direct implementation of the following rules in the order shown below.
Determine the set of roles in which the node is to act. The contents of the SOAP envelope, including header blocks and the body, MAY be inspected in making such determination.
Identify all header blocks targeted at the node that are mandatory.
If one or more of the header blocks identified in the preceding step are not understood by the node then generate a single SOAP MustUnderstand fault (see 4.4.6 MustUnderstand Faults). If such a fault is generated, any further processing MUST NOT be done. Faults relating to the existence or contents of the body MUST NOT be generated in this step.
Process all header blocks targeted at the node and, in the case of the ultimate SOAP recipient, the SOAP body. A SOAP node MUST process all SOAP header blocks targeted at it. A SOAP node MAY choose to ignore the processing implied by non-mandatory SOAP header blocks targeted at it.
In the case of a SOAP intermediary, and where the message is to be forwarded further along the message path, remove all SOAP header blocks targeted at the node, and possibly insert new SOAP header blocks.
In all cases where a SOAP header block is processed, the SOAP node must understand the SOAP block and must do such processing in a manner fully conformant with the specification for that block. The ultimate recipient MUST process the SOAP body, in a manner consistent with 2.5 Structure and Interpretation of SOAP Bodies.
If processing is unsuccessful, exactly one fault MUST be generated by the node. Header-related faults other than mustUnderstand faults (see 4.4 SOAP Fault) MUST be SOAP Sender or DataEncodingUnknown faults (see 4.4.5 SOAP Fault Codes) and MUST conform to the specification for the corresponding SOAP header block. Faults relating to the body MUST be SOAP Sender or DataEncodingUnknown faults (see 4.4.5 SOAP Fault Codes).
SOAP nodes can make reference to any information in the SOAP envelope when processing a SOAP block. For example, a caching function can cache the entire SOAP message, if desired.
The processing of particular SOAP header block MAY control or determine the order of processing for other SOAP header blocks and/or the SOAP body. For example, one could create a SOAP header block to force processing of other SOAP header blocks in lexical order. In the absence of such a controlling block, the order of header and body processing is at the discretion of the SOAP node; header blocks MAY be processed in arbitrary order, and such processing MAY precede, be interleaved with, or MAY follow processing of the body. For example, a "begin transaction" header block would typically precede, a "commit transaction" would likely follow, and a "logging" function might run concurrently with body processing.
If the SOAP node is a SOAP intermediary, the SOAP message pattern and results of processing (e.g. no fault generated) MAY require that the SOAP message be sent further along the SOAP message path. Such relayed SOAP messages MUST contain all SOAP header blocks and the SOAP body from the original SOAP message, in the original order, except that SOAP header blocks targeted at the SOAP intermediary MUST be removed (such SOAP blocks are removed regardless of whether they were processed or ignored). Additional SOAP header blocks MAY be inserted at any point in the SOAP message, and such inserted SOAP header blocks MAY be indistinguishable from one or more just removed (effectively leaving them in place, but emphasizing the need to reinterpret at each SOAP node along the SOAP message path.)
Note:
The above rules apply to processing at a single node.
SOAP extensions MAY be designed to ensure that
mandatory (and other) headers are processed in an appropriate
order, as the message moves along the message path towards the
ultimate recipient. Specifically, such extensions might
specify that a (Sender) fault is generated if some SOAP header
blocks have inadvertently survied past some intended point in
the message path. Such extensions MAY depend on the presence or
value of the mustUnderstand
attribute information item
in the surviving headers when determining whether an error has
occurred.
All SOAP messages have an XML Information Set[10]
A SOAP node MUST ensure that all element information items and attribute information items in messages that it generates are correctly namespace qualified. A SOAP node MUST be able to process SOAP namespace information in messages that it receives. It MUST treat messages with incorrect namespace information as described in 4.1.2 Envelope Versioning Model.
This document defines the following namespaces[7]:
The SOAP envelope has the namespace identifier "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope"
The SOAP MustUnderstand Fault has the namespace identifier "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-faults"
The SOAP Upgrade
element has the namespace
identifier "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-upgrade"
Schema documents for these namespaces can be found by dereferencing the namespace identifiers. These schemas are normative.
A SOAP message MUST NOT contain a Document Type Declaration. On receipt of a SOAP message containing a Document Type Declaration, a SOAP receiver MUST generate a fault (see 4.4 SOAP Fault) with a faultcode of "DTDNotSupported". A SOAP message SHOULD NOT contain processing instruction information items. A SOAP receiver MUST ignore processing instruction information items in SOAP messages it receives.
A SOAP message MUST NOT impose any XML schema processing (assessment and validation) requirement on the part of any receiving SOAP node. Therefore, SOAP REQUIRES that all attribute information items, whether specified in this specification or whether they belong to a foreign namespace be caried in the serialized SOAP envelope.
A SOAP message has an XML Infoset that consists of a document information item with exactly one child, which is an element information item as described below.
The document element information item has:
A local name of Envelope
;
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope;
Zero or more namespace qualified attribute information items;
One or two element information item children in order as follows:
An optional Header
element information
item, see 4.2 SOAP Header;
A mandatory Body
element information
item, see 4.3 SOAP Body;
SOAP defines an encodingStyle
attribute
information item which can be used to indicate the
encoding rules used to serialize a SOAP message.
The encodingStyle
attribute information
item has:
A local name of encodingStyle
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope
Editorial note: MJG | 20010802 |
The following sentence conflicts with the definition of the Body |
It may appear on any element information item in the SOAP message. Its scope is that of its owner element information item and that element information item's descendants, unless a descendant itself owns such an attribute information item.
The encodingStyle
attribute information
item is of type anyURI
in the namespace
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema. Its value identifies a
set of serialization rules that can be used to
deserialize the SOAP message.
encodingStyle="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding" encodingStyle="http://example.org/encoding/" encodingStyle=""
The serialization rules defined by SOAP (see [1]SOAP Encoding)
are identified by the URI "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding".
SOAP messages using this particular serialization SHOULD
indicate this using the SOAP encodingStyle
attribute information item. In addition, all
URIs syntactically beginning with "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding"
indicate conformance with the SOAP encoding rules defined in
[1](SOAP Encoding),
though with potentially tighter rules added.
A value of the zero-length URI ("") explicitly indicates that no claims are made for the encoding style of contained elements. This can be used to turn off any claims from containing elements.
SOAP does not define a traditional versioning model based on major and minor version numbers. If a SOAP message is received by a SOAP 1.2 node in which the document element information item does NOT have a namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope the SOAP node MUST treat this as a version error and generate a VersionMismatch SOAP fault (see 4.4 SOAP Fault). See A Version Transition From SOAP/1.1 to SOAP Version 1.2 for further details.
Any other malformation of the message structure MUST be treated as a Sender SOAP fault.
SOAP provides a flexible mechanism for extending a SOAP message in a decentralized and modular way without prior knowledge between the communicating parties. Typical examples of extensions that can be implemented as SOAP header blocks are authentication, transaction management, payment, etc.
The Header
element information item has:
A local name of Header
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope
Zero or more namespace qualified attribute information item children.
Zero or more namespace qualified element information item children.
All child element information items of the SOAP Header are called SOAP header blocks.
Each SOAP header block element information item:
MUST be namespace qualified;
MAY have an encodingStyle
attribute
information item
MAY have
an actor
attribute information
item
MAY have a mustUnderstand
attribute information item
The SOAP header block attribute information items defined in this section determine how a SOAP receiver should process an incoming SOAP message, as described in 2 SOAP Message Exchange Model.
A SOAP sender
generating a SOAP message SHOULD only use the SOAP header block
attribute information items on
child element information items of the SOAP
Header
element information item.
A SOAP
receiver MUST ignore all SOAP header block attribute
information items that are applied to other
descendant element information
items of the SOAP Header
element information
item.
<env:Header xmlns:env="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope" > <t:Transaction xmlns:t="http://example.org/2001/06/tx" env:mustUnderstand="1" > 5 </t:Transaction> </env:Header>
SOAP header block attribute information items MUST appear in the SOAP message itself in order to be effective; default values which may be specified in an XML Schema or other description language do not affect SOAP processing (see 3 Relation to XML).
As described in 2 SOAP Message Exchange Model, not all
parts of a SOAP message may be intended for the ultimate
SOAP receiver. The actor
attribute
information item is to be used to indicate the
SOAP node at which a particular SOAP header block is
targeted.
The actor
attribute information
item has the following Infoset properties:
A local name of actor
;
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope ;
A specified property with a value of true.
The type of the actor
attribute
information item is anyURI in the
namespace http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema
. The value of the actor
attribute
information item is a URI that names a role that a
SOAP node may assume.
Omitting the SOAP actor
attribute information
item implicitly targets the SOAP header block at the
ultimate SOAP receiver. An empty value for this attribute
is equivalent to omitting the attribute completely, i.e.
targeting the block at the ultimate SOAP recipient.
As described in 2.4 Understanding SOAP Headers, the SOAP
mustUnderstand
attribute information
item is used to indicate whether the processing of a
SOAP header block is mandatory or optional at the target
SOAP node.
The mustUnderstand
attribute information
item has the following Infoset properties:
A local name of mustUnderstand
;
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope;
A specified property with a value of true.
The type of the mustUnderstand
attribute
information item is boolean in the namespace http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema.
Omitting this attribute information item is defined as being
semantically equivalent to including it with a value of
"false".
The SOAP Body
element information item
provides a simple mechanism for exchanging mandatory
information intended for the ultimate SOAP receiver of a SOAP
message. Example uses of SOAP Body
include marshalling RPC
calls and error reporting.
The Body
element information item has:
A local name of Body
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope
Zero or more element information item children.
Editorial note: MJG | 20010802 |
The description of Body does not allow additional attributes. |
All child element information items of the
SOAP Body
element information item:
Editorial note: MJG | 20011025 |
The requirement that direct children of the SOAP body be namespace qualified is a change from previous drafts. The XML Protocol Working Group solicits feedback from implementors on this change. |
MUST be namespace qualified.
MAY
have an encodingStyle
attribute information
item
SOAP defines one particular direct child of the SOAP body, the SOAP fault, which is used for reporting errors (see 4.4 SOAP Fault).
The SOAP Fault
element information
item is used to carry error and/or status information
within a SOAP message. If present, the SOAP Fault
MUST appear as a direct child of the SOAP body and MUST NOT
appear more than
once within a SOAP Body.
The Fault
element information item has:
A local name of Fault
;
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope;
Two or more child element information items in order as follows:
A mandatory faultcode
element
information item, see 4.4.1 SOAP faultcode Element;
A mandatory faultstring
element
information item, see 4.4.2 SOAP faultstring Element;
An optional faultactor
element
information item, see 4.4.3 SOAP faultactor Element;
An optional detail
element
information item, see 4.4.4 SOAP detail Element.
The faultcode
element information item
has:
A local name of faultcode
A namespace name which is empty
The type of the faultcode
element information
item is QName in the
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace. It is
intended for use by software to provide an algorithmic
mechanism for identifying the fault. SOAP defines a small set
of SOAP fault codes covering basic SOAP faults (see 4.4.5 SOAP Fault Codes)
The faultstring
element information item
has:
A local name of faultstring
;
A namespace name which is empty.
The type of the faultstring
element
information item is string in the
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace. It is
intended to provide a human readable explanation of the fault
and is not intended for algorithmic processing. This
element information item is similar to the
'Reason-Phrase' defined by HTTP[2] and
SHOULD provide at least some information explaining the nature
of the fault.
The faultactor
element information item
has:
A local name of faultactor
A namespace name which is empty
The type of the faultactor
element
information item is anyURI in the
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace. It is
intended to provide information about which SOAP node on the
SOAP message path caused the fault to happen (see 2 SOAP Message Exchange Model). It is similar to the SOAP
actor
attribute information item (see
4.2.2 SOAP actor Attribute) but instead of indicating the
target of a SOAP header block, it indicates the source of the
fault. The value of the faultactor
element
information item identifies the source of the
fault. SOAP nodes that do not act as the ultimate SOAP
receiver MUST include this element information
item The ultimate SOAP receiver MAY include this
element information item to indicate explicitly
that it generated the fault.
The detail
element information item
has:
A local name of detail
;
A namespace name which is empty;
Zero or more attribute information items;
Zero or more child element information items.
The detail
element information item
is intended for carrying application specific error
information related to the SOAP Body
. It MUST be
present when the contents of the SOAP Body could not be
processed successfully . It MUST NOT be used to carry error
information about any SOAP header blocks. Detailed error
information for SOAP header blocks MUST be carried within the
SOAP header blocks themselves.
The absence of the detail
element
information item indicates that a SOAP Fault
is not related to the processing of the SOAP Body
.
This can be used to find out whether the SOAP Body
was at least partially processed by the ultimate SOAP receiver
before the fault occurred, or not.
All child element information items of
the detail
element Information Item are
called detail entries.
Each such element information item:
MAY be namespace qualified;
MAY have an encodingStyle
attribute
information item.
The SOAP encodingStyle
attribute information
item is used to indicate the encoding style used for
the detail entries (see 4.1.1 SOAP encodingStyle Attribute).
Editorial note: MJG | 20011130 |
Previous versions of this specification supported a hierarchical notation for fault codes using a 'dot' notation. This support has been removed in this draft and will also be omitted from the next version of this specification unless significant evidence for the contrary is provided. |
SOAP faultcode
values are XML qualified
names [7]. The faultcodes defined in this
section MUST be used as values for the SOAP
faultcode
element information item
when describing faults defined by SOAP 1.2 Part 1 (this
document). The namespace identifier for these SOAP
faultcode
values is "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope".
Other specifications may define their own fault codes. Use
of this namespace is recommended (but not required) in the
specification of such faultcodes
The faultcode
values defined by this specification are listed
in the following table.
Name | Meaning |
---|---|
VersionMismatch | The processing party found an invalid namespace
for the SOAP Envelope element
information item (see 4.1.2 Envelope Versioning Model) |
MustUnderstand | An immediate child element information
item of the SOAP Header element
information item that was either not understood
or not obeyed by the processing party contained a SOAP
mustUnderstand attribute information
item with a value of "true" (see
4.2.3 SOAP mustUnderstand Attribute) |
DTDNotSupported | The SOAP message contained a Document Type Definition ( see 3 Relation to XML ). |
DataEncodingUnknown | A header or body targetted at the current SOAP node is scoped ( See 4.1.1 SOAP encodingStyle Attribute) with a data encoding that the current node does not support. |
Sender | A Sender faultcode
indicates that the message was incorrectly formed or
did not contain the appropriate information in order
to succeed. For example, the message could lack the
proper authentication or payment information. It is
generally an indication that the message should not be
resent without change. See also 4.4 SOAP Fault for a
description of the SOAP fault detail sub-element.
|
Receiver | The Receiver faultcode
indicates that the message could not be processed for
reasons not directly attributable to the contents of
the message itself but rather to the processing of the
message. For example, processing could include
communicating with an upstream SOAP node, which did
not respond. The message may succeed at a later point
in time. See also 4.4 SOAP Fault
for a description of the SOAP fault detail
sub-element. |
When a SOAP node generates a MustUnderstand fault, it SHOULD provide, in the generated fault message, header blocks as described below which detail the qualified names (QNames, per the XML Schema Datatypes specification[5]) of the particular header block(s) which were not understood.
Each such header block element information item has:
A local name of Misunderstood
;
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-faults;
A qname
attribute information
item as desribed below.
The qname
attribute information item
has the following Infoset properties:
A local name of qname
;
A namespace name which is empty;
A specified property with a value of true.
The type of the qname
attribute information
item is QName in the
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema namespace. Its
value is the QName of a header block which the faulting node
failed to understand.
Consider the following message:
Extension1
or Extension2
are not
understood<?xml version="1.0" ?> <env:Envelope xmlns:env='http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope'> <env:Header> <abc:Extension1 xmlns:abc='http://example.org/2001/06/ext' env:mustUnderstand='1' /> <def:Extension2 xmlns:def='http://example.com/stuff' env:mustUnderstand='1' /> </env:Header> <env:Body> . . . </env:Body> </env:Envelope>
The above message would result in the fault message shown
below if the recipient of the initial message does not
understand the two header elements abc:Extension1
and def:Extension2
.
Extension1
and
Extension2
<?xml version="1.0" ?> <env:Envelope xmlns:env='http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope' xmlns:f='http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-faults' > <env:Header> <f:Misunderstood qname='abc:Extension1' xmlns:abc='http://example.org/2001/06/ext' /> <f:Misunderstood qname='def:Extension2' xmlns:def='http://example.com/stuff' /> </env:Header> <env:Body> <env:Fault> <faultcode>env:MustUnderstand</faultcode> <faultstring>One or more mandatory headers not understood</faultstring> </env:Fault> </env:Body> </env:Envelope>
Note that when serializing the qname
attribute
information item there must be an in-scope namespace
declaration for the namespace name of the misunderstood
header and the value of the attribute information
item must use the prefix of such a namespace
declaration
Note also that there is no guarantee that each MustUnderstand error contains ALL misunderstood header QNames. SOAP nodes MAY generate a fault after the first header block that causes an error containing details about that single header block only, alternatively SOAP nodes MAY generate a combined fault detailing all of the MustUnderstand problems at once.
SOAP provides a simple messaging framework with a core set of functionality which is primarily concerned with providing extensibility. The SOAP processing model (2 SOAP Message Exchange Model) describes the behavior of a single SOAP node with respect to the processing of an individual message.
The sending and receiving of SOAP messages by a SOAP node is mediated by a binding to an underlying protocol. A SOAP underlying protocol binding operates between adjacent SOAP nodes along a SOAP message path. A binding does not provide a separate processing model and does not constitute a SOAP node by itself. Rather a SOAP binding is an integral part of a SOAP node. There is no requirement that the same underlying protocol is used for all hops along a SOAP message path.
As part of communicating between SOAP nodes it may be necessary to introduce a variety of abstract features generally associated with the exchange of messages in a protocol environment. Although SOAP poses no constraints on the potential scope of such features, typical examples include "reliability", "security", "correlation", and "routing". In addition, the communication may require message exchange patterns (MEPs) beyond the one-way MEP that SOAP provides. MEPs are considered to be a type of feature; unless otherwise stated, references to the term "feature" apply also to MEPs.
In some cases, underlying protocols are equipped, either directly or through extension, with mechanisms for providing certain features, in whole or in part. Features are the modular components from which the contract between SOAP nodes and the bindings they support are formed. The SOAP binding framework provides a framework for describing these features and how they relate to SOAP nodes. A SOAP binding specification declares the features provided by a binding and describes how the services of the underlying protocol are used to honor the contract formed by the declaration of features supported by that binding. In addition, a binding specification defines the requirements for building a conformant implementation of the binding being specified.
The combination of the SOAP extensibility model and the SOAP binding framework provides some flexibility in the way that particular features can be expressed: they can be expressed entirely within the SOAP envelope (as blocks), outside the envelope (typically in a manner that is specific to the underlying protocol), or as a combination of such expressions. It is up to the communicating nodes to decide how best to express particular features; often when a binding-level implementation for a particular feature is available, utilizing it when appropriate will provide for optimized processing.
Editorial note: HFN | 20011201 |
Some discussion continues on how best to represent the balance of responsibility between binding specifications in particular, vs. other software at the SOAP node, when dealing with features that are represented entirely within the SOAP envelope. The paragraph above may need some additional work to clarify |
As described above, SOAP messages can be transported using a variety of underlying protocols. SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts[1] includes the specification for a binding to HTTP. Additional bindings can be created by specifications that conform to the binding framework introduced in this chapter. The goals of the binding framework are:
To set out the requirements and concepts that are common to all binding specifications.
To facilitate homogenous description of bindings that support common features.
To facilitate homogenous description of bindings that support common features.
Note, that the second and third goals above are related: two or more bindings may offer a given optional feature, such as reliable delivery, with one operating using an underlying protocol that directly facilitates the feature (the protocol is reliable), and the other providing the logic (logging and retransmission) in the binding. The feature can be made available to applications in a consistent manner, regardless of which binding is used.
The creation, transmission, and processing of a SOAP message, possibly through one or more intermediaries, is specified in terms of a distributed state machine. The state consists of information known to a SOAP node at a given point in time, including but not limited to the contents of messages being assembled for transmission or received for processing. The state at each node can be updated either by local processing, or by information received from an adjacent node.
Section 2 SOAP Message Exchange Model of this specification describes the processing that is common to all SOAP nodes when receiving a message. The purpose of a binding specification is to augment those core SOAP rules with any additional processing that may be particular to the binding, and to specify the manner in which the underlying protocol is used to transmit information between adjacent nodes in the message path.
Thus, the distributed state machine that manages the transmission of a given SOAP message through its message path is the combination of the core SOAP processing (see 2 SOAP Message Exchange Model) operating at each node, in conjunction with the binding specifications connecting each pair of nodes.
As described above, SOAP can be augmented with optional features, (such as reliable message delivery, request/response MEPs, multicast MEPs, etc.). The specification of each such feature MUST include the following:
The information (state) required at each node to implement the feature.
The processing required at each node in order to fulfill the obligations of the feature.
The information transmitted from node to node, and in the case of MEPs, any requirements to generate additional messages (such as responses to requests in a request/response MEP).
Every binding specification MUST support the transmission and processing of one-way messages as described in this specification. A binding specification MAY state that it supports additional features, in which case the binding specification MUST provide for maintaining state, performing processing, and transmitting information in a manner consistent with the specification for those features.
In cases where multiple features are supported by a binding specification the specifications for those features must provide any information necessary for their successful use in combination; this binding framework does not provide any explicit mechanism for ensuring such compatibility of multiple features.
The binding framework provides no fixed means of naming or typing the information comprising the state at a given node. Individual feature and binding specifications are free to adopt their own conventions for specifying state. Note, however, that consistency across bindings and features is likely to be enhanced in situations where multiple feature specifications adopt consistent conventions for representing state. For example, multiple features may benefit from a consistent specification for an authentication credential, the transaction ID, etc. The HTTP binding in SOAP Part 2[1] illustrates one such convention.
As described in 4 SOAP Envelope, each SOAP message is modeled as an XML Infoset that consists of a document information item with exactly one child: the envelope element information item. Therefore, the minimum responsibility of a binding in transmitting a message is to specify the means by which the SOAP XML Infoset is transferred to and reconstituted by the binding at the receiving SOAP node and to specify the manner in which the transmission of the envelope is effected using the facilities of the underlying protocol. The binding framework does NOT require that every binding use the XML 1.0[8] serialization as the "on the wire" representation of the Infoset; compressed, encrypted, fragmented representations and so on can be used if appropriate.
Bindings MAY depend on state that is modeled as being outside
of the SOAP XML Infoset (e.g. retry counts), and MAY transmit
such information to adjacent nodes. For example, some bindings
take a message delivery address (typically URI) that is not
within the envelope; the HTTP binding in Part 2[1]
(see Using SOAP in HTTP)
transmits an HTTP field named SOAPAction
that is not
contained within the SOAP XML Infoset.
Some underlying protocols may be designed for a particular purpose or application profile. SOAP bindings to such protocols MAY use the same endpoint identification (e.g., TCP port number) as the underlying protocol, in order to reuse the existing infrastructure associated that protocol.
However, the use of well-known ports by SOAP may incur additional, unintended handling by intermediaries and underlying implementations. For example, HTTP is commonly thought of as a "Web browsing" protocol, and network administrators may place certain restrictions upon its use, or may interpose services such as filtering, content modification, routing, etc. Often, these services are interposed using port number as a heuristic.
As a result, binding definitions for underlying protocols with well-known default ports or application profiles SHOULD document potential (harmful?) interactions with commonly deployed infrastructure at those default ports or in-conformance with default application profiles. Binding definitions SHOULD also illustrate the use of the binding on a non-default port as a means of avoiding unintended interaction with such services.
SOAP uses URIs for some identifiers including, but not
limited to, values of the encodingStyle
(see 4.1.1 SOAP encodingStyle Attribute) and actor
(see 4.2.2 SOAP actor Attribute) attribute information items.
To SOAP, a URI is simply a formatted string that identifies a web
resource via its name, location, or via any other characteristics.
Although this section only applies to URIs directly used by information items defined by this specification, it is RECOMMENDED but NOT REQUIRED that application-defined data carried within a SOAP envelope use the same mechanisms and guidelines defined here for handling URIs.
URIs used as values in information items identified by the
"http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope" and
"http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-encoding" XML
namespaces can be either relative or absolute. In addition,
URIs used as values of the local, unqualified href
attribute information item can be relative or absolute.
SOAP does not define a base URI but relies on the mechanisms defined in XML Base[11] and RFC 2396[6] for establishing a base URI against which relative URIs can be made absolute.
The underlying protocol binding MAY define a base URI which can act as the base URI for the SOAP envelope (see 5 SOAP Protocol Binding Framework and the HTTP binding[1]).
SOAP does not define any equivalence rules for URIs in general as these are defined by the individual URI schemes and by RFC 2396[6]. However, because of inconsistencies with respect to URI equivalence rules in many current URI parsers, it is RECOMMENDED that SOAP senders do NOT rely on any special equivalence rules in SOAP receivers in order to determine equivalence between URI values used in a SOAP message.
The use of IP addresses in URIs SHOULD be avoided whenever possible (see RFC 1900[16]). However, when used, the literal format for IPv6 addresses in URI's as described by RFC 2732[12] SHOULD be supported.
SOAP does not place any a priori limit on the length of a URI. Any SOAP node MUST be able to handle the length of any URI that it publishes and both SOAP senders and SOAP receivers SHOULD be able to deal with URIs of at least 8k in length.
The SOAP/1.1 specification[15] says the following on versioning in section 4.1.2:
"SOAP does not define a traditional versioning model
based on major and minor version numbers. A SOAP message MUST
have an Envelope
element associated with the
"http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" namespace. If a
message is received by a SOAP application in which the SOAP
Envelope
element is associated with a different
namespace, the application MUST treat this as a version error
and discard the message. If the message is received through a
request/response protocol such as HTTP, the application MUST
respond with a SOAP VersionMismatch faultcode message (see
section 4.4) using the SOAP
"http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
namespace."
That is, rather than a versioning model based on shortnames (typically version numbers), SOAP uses a declarative extension model which allows a sender to include the desired features within the SOAP envelope construct. SOAP says nothing about the granularity of extensions nor how extensions may or may not affect the basic SOAP processing model. It is entirely up to extension designers be it either in a central or a decentralized manner to determine which features become SOAP extensions.
The SOAP extensibility model is based on the following three basic assumptions:
SOAP versioning is directed only at the SOAP envelope. It explicitly does not address versioning of blocks, encodings, protocol bindings, or otherwise.
A SOAP node must determine whether it supports the
version of a SOAP message on a per message basis. In the
following, "support" means understanding the semantics of the
envelope version identified by the QName of the
Envelope
element information item:
A SOAP node receiving an envelope that it doesn't support must not attempt to process the message according to any other processing rules regardless of other up- or downstream SOAP nodes.
A SOAP node may provide support for multiple envelope versions. However, when processing a message a SOAP node must use the semantics defined by the version of that message.
It is essential that the envelope remains stable over time and that new features are added using the SOAP extensibility mechanism. Changing the envelope inherently affects interoperability, adds complexity, and requires central control of extensions -- all of which directly conflicts with the SOAP requirements.
The rules for dealing with the possible SOAP/1.1 and SOAP Version 1.2 interactions are as follows:
Because of the SOAP/1.1 rules, a compliant SOAP/1.1 node receiving a SOAP Version 1.2 message will generate a VersionMismatch SOAP fault using an envelope qualified by the "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" namespace identifier.
A SOAP Version 1.2 node receiving a SOAP/1.1 message may either process the message as SOAP/1.1 or generate a SOAP VersionMismatch fault using the "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" namespace identifier. As part of the SOAP VersionMismatch fault, a SOAP Version 1.2 node should include the list of envelope versions that it supports using the SOAP upgrade extension identified by the "http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-upgrade" identifier.
The upgrade extension consists of an Upgrade
element
information item.
The Upgrade
element information
item contains an ordered list of namespace
identifiers of SOAP envelopes that the SOAP node supports in
the order most to least preferred
The Upgrade
element information item has:
A local name of Upgrade
;
A namespace name of http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-upgrade;
One or more envelope
child element
information items as described below:
The envelope
element information item has:
A local name of envelope
;
A namespace name which is empty;
An unqualified attribute information item with a
local name of qname
and a type of QName
in
the "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" namespace.
The value of the qname
attribute information
item specifies the qualified name of an element that
the SOAP node accepts as the top-level element of a SOAP message
Following is an example of a VersionMismatch fault generated by a SOAP Version 1.2 node including the SOAP upgrade extension:
<?xml version="1.0" ?> <env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"> <env:Header> <V:Upgrade xmlns:V="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-upgrade"> <envelope qname="ns1:Envelope" xmlns:ns1="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope"/> </V:Upgrade> </env:Header> <env:Body> <env:Fault> <faultcode>env:VersionMismatch</faultcode> <faultstring>Version Mismatch</faultstring> </env:Fault> </env:Body> </env:Envelope>
The following is an example of some future SOAP node which
returns multiple envelope elements in the Upgrade element. This
SOAP node prefers the Envelope
element in the "http://www.example.org/2002/10/soap-envelope"
namespace but will also accept the Envelope
element in the
"http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope" namespace
<?xml version="1.0" ?> <env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"> <env:Header> <V:Upgrade xmlns:V="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-upgrade"> <envelope qname="ns1:Envelope" xmlns:ns1="http://www.example.org/2002/10/soap-envelope"/> <envelope qname="ns2:Envelope" xmlns:ns2="http://www.w3.org/2001/12/soap-envelope"/> </V:Upgrade> </env:Header> <env:Body> <env:Fault> <faultcode>env:VersionMismatch</faultcode> <faultstring>Version Mismatch</faultstring> </env:Fault> </env:Body> </env:Envelope>
Note that existing SOAP/1.1 nodes are not likely to indicate which envelope versions they support. If nothing is indicated then this means that SOAP/1.1 is the only supported envelope.
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.), 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.
Date | Author | Description |
---|---|---|
20011213 | MJH | Updated namespace URIs, fixed spelling error. |
20011211 | MJH | Added section headings for faultcode, faultstring, faultactor and detail elements. |
20011211 | MJH | Fixed a number of spelling errors and grammatical problems throughout the document. Applied some limited rewording to improve readability. |
20011211 | MJH | Removed duplicate description of "must happen" extension from section 2. |
20011206 | MJH | Removed more mentions of body blocks. |
20011206 | MJH | Limited rewording and removal of duplication from section 2. In particular, removed namespace definition for mU and actor (this is in section 4) and massaged text in processing model to remove duplication and improve readability. |
20011206 | MJH | Incorporated Chris Ferris suggested changes to glossary and section 2. |
20011206 | MJH | General editorial work on new sections. Added references and other tagging as required. |
20011206 | MJH | Incorporated agreed changes to URIs in SOAP section (remove duplication with XML base and cite XML base more strongly). |
20011206 | MJH | Incorporated issue 155 resolution. |
20011205 | JJM | Elevated the header removal step to a processing model step. |
20011204 | MJH | Added bibref to Use of URIs section and tidied up the language in that section. |
20011204 | MJH | Modified soapEncoding descriptive text - Issues 159 and 166. |
20011204 | JJM | Added text to section 2.2, second paragraph, to indicate none blocks may carry data for processing of other blocks. |
20011204 | JJM | Section 2.2, four paragraph, added "anonymous actor" to the list. |
20011204 | JJM | Section 2.3, remove text for SOAP body blocks. |
20011204 | JJM | Section 2.3, replace "has assumed the role of the anonymous actor" by "is the ultimate receiver". |
20011204 | JJM | Section 2.4, incorporated 2 paragraph previously in section 2. |
20011204 | JJM | Added section 2.5 (text from Noah). |
20011204 | JJM | Added an extra step to the processing model (now section 2.6). |
20011204 | JJM | Simplified step 3, and moved the previous text further below in the same section (2.6). |
20011204 | JJM | Section 2.6, incorporated text from section 4. |
20011204 | JJM | Section 4.2.2, removed explanation of next and none roles. |
20011204 | JJM | Section 4.2.2, added text to indicate the meaning of an empty actor attribute. |
20011204 | JJM | Trimmed section 4.2.3, as the text is now in section 2. |
20011204 | JJM | Removed section 4.3.1, since body processing is now in section 2.6. |
20011204 | JJM | Added ednote to flag the definition for SOAP block is out of date. |
20011204 | JJM | Reformated section 5 (Binding Framework). |
20011204 | JJM | Reformated section 6 (Use of URIs in SOAP). Removed non ASCII characters. |
20011204 | JJM | Added missing "att" and "attval" around elements and attributes in section 6. |
20011204 | JJM | Fixed a number of lax references in section 6. |
20011201 | HFN | Added SOAP Protocol Binding Framework |
20011201 | HFN | Added section on URIs and XML Base |
2001129 | MJG | Incorporated resolution text for Issue 146 into Section 2.3 |
2001129 | MJG | Changed "Client" and "Server" fault codes to be "Sender" and "Receiver" respectively as resolution of Issue 143 |
2001129 | MJG | Removed dot notation from spec. Added "DTDNotSupported" fault code to fault code table. |
20011122 | MJH | Incorporated resolution to issue 172 (criteria for generating version mismatch fault into 4.1.2 Envelope Versioning Model. Removed duplication of versioning error text and associated ednote from 3 Relation to XML |
20011029 | MJH | Changed "default actor" to "anonymous actor". |
20011029 | MJH | Amended relation to XML section (Issue 135). |
20011029 | MJH | Amended section 2.5 (Issue 157). |
20011029 | MJH | Removed citation of ABNF - not used in part 1. |
20011029 | MJH | Amended section 1.3 (Issue 150) |
20011029 | MJH | Amended section 1.1 (Issue 149) |
20011029 | MJH | Amended introductory text (Issue 148) |
20011029 | MJH | Amended introductory text (Issue 147) |
20011029 | MJH | Amended abstract (Issue 147) |
20011026 | MJG | Amended text in Section 2.5 bullet 2 ( Issue 158 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Amended text in Section 2.4 para 2 ( Issue 156 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Amended text in Section 2.1 para 2 ( Issue 152 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Amended prose related to DTDs and PIs ( Issue 4 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Added text to state that SOAP is no longer an acronym ( Issue 125 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Amended description of Upgrade extension in Appendix A to be Infoset based. |
20011026 | MJG | Added an example of returning multiple versions in the VersionMismatch header to Appendix A ( Issue 119 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Added definition of SOAP Application to glossary ( Issue 139 ) |
20011026 | MJG | Added xml declaration to all XML examples with a root of env:Envelope or xs:schema ( Issue 10 ) |
20011025 | MJG | Changed MAY to MUST regarding namespace qualification of SOAP body blocks ( Issue 141 ) |
20011011 | MJG | Added para to section 2.2 on criteria ( or lack thereof ) for determining whether a SOAP node acts as a particular actor |
20010926 | MJG | Updated member list |
20010926 | MJG | Removed extra double quotes around certain URLs |
20010921 | MJG | Changed targetNamespace attribute of faults schema to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-faults |
20010921 | MJG | Changed targetNamespace attribute of upgrade schema to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-upgrade |
20010921 | MJG | Changed targetNamespace attribute of envelope schema to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-envelope |
20010921 | MJG | Modified content model of Envelope complex type in envelope schema to disallow content after the Body element. |
20010920 | JJM | Included MarkN's text regarding issue 11 and 13 as amended by Stuart in the specification and expand the ednote appropriately. |
20010920 | JJM | Change the namespace of the envelope to http://www.w3.org/2001/09/... |
20010918 | JJM | Incorporated several editorial comments from Stuart Williams. |
20010918 | JJM | Removed reference to trailer from the "SOAP Envelope" section. |
20010914 | JJM | Fixed issues 124, 126, 127, 128 and 132. |
20010914 | JJM | Used the rewrite from Mark Nottingham for section "SOAPAction attribute". |
20010914 | JJM | Incoporated text from Mark Nottingham clarifying the role of none blocks. |
20010914 | JJM | Reference the XML InfoSet Proposed Recommandation instead of the Candidate Recommandation. |
20010911 | JJM | Changed XML Information Set into a normative reference. Changed XML Protocol Comments Archive, Discussion Archive and Charter into non-normative references. Removed "as illustrated above" from section 2. Added missing parantheses in sections 2.5 and 4.1.1. |
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 encoding schema changes. Added bibref entries for cross references to Part 2, 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. |
20010830 | MJG | Added an element declaration for a Fault element of type Fault to the envelope schema |
20010830 | JJM | Removed terminology not relevant for part1. |
20010830 | JJM | Moved some introductory examples to part2. |
20010830 | JJM | Moved SOAP example appendix to part2. |
20010830 | JJM | Added a paragraph to section 1 pointing to part2 for encoding, rpc and http binding. |
20010829 | JJM | Added a placeholder for the forthcoming Transport Binding Framework section. |
20010829 | JJM | Updated the spec's title. |
20010829 | JJM | Replaced specref with xspecref for references to Part2 items. |
20010829 | JJM | Added bibliography entry for SOAP 1.2 Part 2. |
20010829 | JJM | Removed former sections 5, 6, 7 and 8. |
20010829 | JJM | Did split the spec into two parts. |
20010829 | JJM | Refered 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 David's 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 doesn't 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 seperate faults schema. Removed entry in envelope schema change table in Appendix D.2 that refered to additon 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 Fallside's 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. |
The envelope schema has been updated to be compliant with the XML Schema Recomendation[4][5]. The table below shows the categories of change.
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 |
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 envelope 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-envelope |
Clarification | Changed element and attribute wildcards in Envelope complex type to namespace="##other" |
Clarification | Changed element and attribute wildcards in Header complex type to namespace="##other" |
Clarification | Added explicit namespace="##any" to element and attribute wildcards in Body complex type |
Clarification | Added explicit namespace="##any" to element and attribute wildcards in detail complex type |
Clarification | Added an element wildcard with namespace="##other" to the Fault complex type |
Name | Changed item type of encodingStyle from uri-reference to anyURI |
Name | Changed type of actor attribute from uri-reference to anyURI |
Name | Changed type of faultactor attribute from uri-reference to anyURI |
Semantic | Added processContents="lax" to all element and attribute wildcards |
Semantic | Changed type of the mustUnderstand 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. |
Style | Where possible comments have been changed into annotations |
Syntax | Changed all occurences of maxOccurs="*" to maxOccurs="unbounded" |
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 |
In addition several changes occured in the names of datatypes in the XML Schema specification and some datatypes were removed. The following table lists those changes.
Datatype | Class | Description |
---|---|---|
timeDuration | Renamed | New name is duration |
timeInstant | Renamed | New name is dateTime |
recurringDuration | Removed | The recurringDuration datatype no longer exists. |
recurringInstant | Removed | The recurringInstant datatype no longer exists. |
binary | Removed | The binary datatype has been replaced by the hexBinary and base64Binary datatypes. |
month | Renamed | New name is gYearMonth |
timePeriod | Removed | The timePeriod datatype no longer exists |
year | Renamed | New name is gYear |
century | Removed | The century datatype no longer exists |
recurringDate | Renamed | New name is gMonthDay |
recurringDay | Renamed | New name is gDay |