W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > August 2009

NEW ISSUE: Should SOAPJMS_requestURI be in the response message?

From: Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:54:45 -0700
Message-ID: <4A930C25.10604@tibco.com>
To: SOAP-JMS <public-soap-jms@w3.org>
Title: Spurious inclusion of SOAPJMS_requestURI?

Description: Is SOAPJMS_requestURI message property appropriate in a
response?

Justification:

This came up as an action item:
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/93

... however, it appears it was mistakenly associated in the minutes of
the meeting with Protocol-2035, instead of Protocol-2039.  See also the
table at:
http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html#responder-transition

(Of course the *request* message should have the requestURI, the
question is whether or not the response should.)

It would seem that during that conference call, we thought it
appropriate to reconsider the requirement that the *response* have the
requestURI.

The text that we currently have for this property:
http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html#requestURI

... indicates that it is required.  To resolve action-93, we should
formally decide whether or not we still agree with this.

Options seem to be:
a) Do nothing.
b) Change the normative text for Protocol-2022 to indicate that the
absence of this property is not an error on a *response* message.

Proposals:
(b) from above - change the normative text from Protocol-2022 so that
requestURI is no longer *required* on the response, and remove it from
the table found in:
http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms.html#responder-transition
Received on Monday, 24 August 2009 21:55:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:16:21 GMT