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

ACTION-55

From: Phil Adams <phil_adams@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:48:06 -0600
To: public-soap-jms@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF9778DE26.3F68C5EA-ON8625753D.0050C54D-8625753D.0056CE50@us.ibm.com>
Re: Action-55...   after reviewing the SOAP/JMS binding spec again, along 
with  a couple of other SOAP-related specs, I think we should consider 
re-wording section 2.4 of the SOAP/JMS binding spec slightly to be less 
prescriptive about the actual formatting of the message body (SOAP 
envelope vs MIME multipart message).    The reason being...  SOAP 
processors, in general, have the freedom to produce either a SOAP Envelope 
or a MIME multipart message irrespective of whether attachments are 
present or not.  For example, if MTOM is enabled for a particular message 
exchange the underlying SOAP "serializer" may create a MIME multipart 
message even if there are no attachments (i.e. there's no decision 
making...  MTOM-enabled implies MIME multipart message; MTOM-disabled 
implies simple SOAP envelope).   I'm not debating whether this particular 
behavior is correct or not, but it is sort of out of scope for the 
SOAP/JMS binding spec, IMO.  I think the only real requirement that we 
should specify in the binding spec is that the SOAP processor generate a 
"SOAP message package" (envelope or MIME multipart message) which is 
consistent with the corresponding value for "content-type". 

With that in mind, I would like to propose that we re-word section 2.4 to 
something like this:

The contents of the JMS Message body MUST be the SOAP payload as a JMS 
BytesMessage or TextMessage.[Definition: Use fault subcode 
unsupportedJMSMessageFormat when the arriving message format is not 
BytesMessage or TextMessage. †]. The formatting of the SOAP payload should 
follow the same rules as for the SOAP/HTTP binding, as described in the 
following specifications:  <list the specs here>.   The primary 
requirement is that the value used for the Content-type property must be 
consistent with the formatting of the SOAP payload.   For example, if the 
SOAP payload is formatted as a simple SOAP envelope, the Content-type 
property should be specified as "text/xml" (for SOAP 1.1) or 
"application/soap+xml" (for SOAP 1.2).  On the other hand, if the SOAP 
payload is formatted as a MIME multipart message, the Content-type 
property should be specified as "multipart/related".   In this way, the 
SOAP node determines the proper formatting of the SOAP payload 
irrespective of the underlying JMS message, and specifies a corresponding 
value for the Content-type property which appropriately describes it to 
the receiving SOAP node.

Comments?

Phil 
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Phil Adams
phil_adams@us.ibm.com
WebSphere Application Server
Office: (512) 286-5041 (t/l 363)
Web Services Development
Mobile: (512) 750-6599
IBM - Austin, TX


Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2009 15:48:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:16:20 GMT