- From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 12:26:16 +0200
- To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
Sorry, that should be lc70. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/lc-issues/#lc70 Cheers, On Jun 12, 2005, at 12:22 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Jacek, > > This LC issue was designated lc71 [1]. > > The Working Group has previously considered this as i031, "Making > wsa:Action Optional" [2]. Although there were some parties who > disagreed, we voted to maintain the status quo in the submission, > which requires Action. You may be interested in the minutes of the > meeting [3] where this decision took place. > > As such, we don't find any new information in the issue you've raised, > and have closed it with no action. > > Regards, > > 1. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/lc-issues/#lc71 > 2. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i031 > 3. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/4/dec-f2f-minutes.html#item24 > > > On May 3, 2005, at 4:45 PM, Jacek Kopecky wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> >> as an LC comment for WS-Addressing, I'd like to voice my disagreement >> with the decision in WS-Addressing that action IRI is mandatory in all >> WS-Addressing-compliant messages. >> >> The spec says "It is RECOMMENDED that the value of the [action] >> property >> is an IRI identifying an input, output, or fault message within a WSDL >> port type. An action may be explicitly or implicitly associated with >> the >> corresponding WSDL definition." >> >> This shows that WS-Addressing ascribes semantics to WSDL operations, >> which the WSDL specification doesn't currently warrant. I don't object >> to this particular assumption, but you should be aware that other WSDL >> users may have a different view. >> >> WSDL 2 contains an Operation Name Mapping Requirement [1] that assumes >> that the bodies of the messages in a single WSDL interface >> unambiguously >> identify the operation, or that an extension is present that enables >> the >> receiver of a message to identify the intended operation, and by >> extension (using the above assumption) identify the intended >> semantics. >> >> Therefore, if [action] identifies the input, output or fault within a >> WSDL interface, as RECOMMENDED, and if the default action pattern >> currently present in the WS-Addressing WSDL Binding draft [2] is used, >> and in fact if WS-Addressing action is not the mechanism for >> fulfilling >> the Operation Name Mapping Requirement, then [action] is redundant. >> >> That's a lot of ifs but given the current ways of generating WSDL that >> are known to me it seems like a very common scenario. >> >> If I was implementing a Web Services stack, I'd like it to allow the >> use >> of WS-Addressing, but not require it. Therefore I'd choose to identify >> the intended semantics of messages in general from their bodies. >> Therefore WSDLs generated by this tooling would either not specify >> action (and thus recommend the use of the default action pattern) or >> simply put the same action, for example "http://example.com/dwim", on >> all messages, and by default ignore the action property in incoming >> messages. >> >> So I basically don't see a reason for [action] to be mandatory in >> WS-Addressing. >> >> I propose two options for a solution: >> >> 1) Factor [action] out of WS-Addressing, to a specification (called >> WS-Semantics?) that would be optionally combinable with WS-Addressing, >> >> 2) or make [action] optional, i.e. MAY-strength, >> >> and in both cases [action] should be formulated as an extension or >> feature to be used in WSDL 2 to fulfill the Operation Name Mapping >> Requirement, if the message bodies don't suffice. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Jacek Kopecky >> >> Ph.D. student researcher >> Digital Enterprise Research Institute >> University of Innsbruck >> http://www.deri.org/ >> >> >> [1] >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-wsdl20-20040803/#Interface_OperationName >> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050215/#_Toc77464322 >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist > Office of the CTO BEA Systems > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > --------- > > Join CEO Alfred Chuang and CTO Mark Carges on June 15 for a unique > online event, giving you the first look at a new category of > enterprise software built specifically for Service-Oriented > Architecture (SOA). > > Register Now. It's Free! > > http://www.bea.com/events/june15 > > -- Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist Office of the CTO BEA Systems -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Join CEO Alfred Chuang and CTO Mark Carges on June 15 for a unique online event, giving you the first look at a new category of enterprise software built specifically for Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA). Register Now. It's Free! http://www.bea.com/events/june15
Received on Sunday, 12 June 2005 10:27:22 UTC