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

Re: i003: WSDL 1.1/2.0 MEPs. Initial proposal (long)

From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:00:02 -0500
To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041115200002.GL8129@w3.org>
Hi Gudge.

* Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com> [2004-11-11 12:26-0800]
[..]
> 7.	WSDL 2.0 In-Out
[..]
> Comments: This two-way MEP states that Message 2 MUST be sent to the originator of Message 1 (even if it's a fault). So for message 1 the [reply endpoint] property MUST be exactly the same as the [source endpoint] property. And if [fault endpoint] appears it must also be exactly the same as the [source endpoint] property. I could see making the [source endpoint] property optional and stating that [reply endpoint] is considered to be the originator. And then say that IF [source endpoint] and [reply endpoint] appear then they must be exactly the same.

This was discussed last week at the WSDWG F2F, and there was general
agreement in the WG that this actually isn't the case.

Basically, MEPs in WSDL 2.0 are defined in terms of nodes, which is
not defined (ha!). The WG agreed to clarify that a node is a logical
entity, which may appear at different addresses — e.g. you send the
reply to me, but at this other address of mine.

I expect the WSDWG to come up with a resolution real soon (it was
entangled with another issue about another MEP).

Cheers,

Hugo

-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/

Received on Monday, 15 November 2004 20:59:19 GMT

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