W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > November 2004

Re: Mandator wsa:Action (was Re: WS-Addr issues)

From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:07:25 -0500
To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org, David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, Mark Little <mark.little@arjuna.com>
Message-id: <A96CB75C-31A8-11D9-8F18-000A95BC8D92@Sun.COM>

On Nov 6, 2004, at 4:12 AM, Martin Gudgin wrote:
>>> Without going
>>> further on that (which I could but we've got an overload of messages
>>> already), my point was that people ended up always looking into the
>>> message to determine the "action" under the optional soap 1.1 action
>>> header.  A mandatory WSA:Action breaks that cycle and an optional
>>> Action
>>> perpetuates it.
>>>
>> I'm OK with a particular service requiring the presence of an action.
>> I'm not OK with requiring every message to carry one even when the
>> service they are destined for doesn't use it. This is where
>> we ended up
>> in the XMLP WG and I think its a good compromise position.
>
> If a service doesn't require wsa:Action, then perhaps it shouldn't be
> usign WS-Addressing?
>
All or nothing eh. Why force folks to make such a stark choice over 
something that in some cases carries no useful information.

Marc.

---
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Monday, 8 November 2004 17:08:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:59 GMT