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

Re: Sample SOAP message on the wire with Reference Properties and Parameters (without a wrapper!)

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:01:20 -0500
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFB3E65614.12BC85A7-ON85256F56.0055C56B-85256F56.0058037D@us.ibm.com>

Mark,

Please see Paco's recent missive[1]... the EPR is NOT an identifier, it is 
an addressable reference.

The ref props/params *can* be used to provide additional information that 
the service provider will use
as it sees fit. One such purpose that has been used by WS-RF has been to 
pass keys/identifiers to 
resources (implied resource pattern) as ref props, but that is not the 
only use of ref props/params.
In the context of the implied resource pattern, the ref props serialized 
as SOAP headers can be
considered the equivalent of cookies used to associate a stateful session, 
like a shopping cart service
might do.

As an example that is often used, a service might have three levels of 
service; silver, gold and platinum.
Each level of service might have a different policy that applies. Hence, I 
would use the ref props to 
include a <myservice:MembershipLevel> element with the possible values 
Silver, Gold, or Platinum.
Is that identity? Nope. 

[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/0355.html

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295

public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 11/24/2004 09:48:35 AM:

> 
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 11:28:50AM -0500, Christopher B Ferris wrote:
> >
> > Dims,
> >
> > Why? There is no utility in making such a distinction from the 
perspective
> > of a received message, they are
> > simply SOAP header blocks that are processed in the usual manner using 
the
> > SOAP processing model.
> 
> Has the WG decided what the identifier is yet?  Because if it has, I
> maintain that it's maximally self-descriptive for the identifier to be
> able to be located within the message which provides increased
> visibility for (generally) very little cost.  Some might recall the
> issue with HTTP 1.0 allowing partial URIs in the request line, and the
> ensuing problems for supporting virtual hosting.  This necessitated the
> introduction of the Host header in HTTP 1.1 which restored the lost
> identifying information.
> 
> If the URI + RefProps is the identifier, then the RefProps need to be
> declared as such.  If it's just the URI, then all is good; wsa:To
> suffices.  If it's the whole EPR, then you need a way to distinguish
> RefProps & RefParams from each other, as well as other SOAP headers.
> 
> Self-description means never having to say you're sorry.
> 
> Mark.
> -- 
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
> 
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 16:01:36 GMT

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