W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > December 2005

Re: test 1230 and 1231 appear to be the same

From: Dan Diephouse <dan@envoisolutions.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 08:42:12 -0500
Message-ID: <43983834.400@envoisolutions.com>
To: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
CC: public-ws-addressing@w3.org

Yes but neither of them explicitly define the ReplyTo endpoint as far as 
I can see (and it seems like 1231 should). I found another person in the 
ws-addressing-test archives who notes the same thing:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0002.html


Marc Hadley wrote:
> This may be deliberate. The spec says that if the ReplyTo 'element is 
> NOT present then the value of the [address] property of the [reply 
> endpoint] EPR is "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous"'. 
> The two cases test explicit and implicit anonymous reply endpoints.
>
> Marc.
>
> On Dec 7, 2005, at 3:50 PM, Dan Diephouse wrote:
>
>>
>> Tests 1230 and 1231 appear to be the exact same.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/testcases/#test1230
>> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/testcases/#test1231
>>
>> For 1231 the text says "Two-way message exchange containing an Action 
>> and a ReplyTo of anonymous. All other fields are defaulted." - but in 
>> the linked to message there is no ReplyTo defined. I'm assuming this 
>> is the critical difference between the two tests cases and someone 
>> just left the ReplyTo out?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - Dan
>>
>> --Dan Diephouse
>> Envoi Solutions LLC
>> http://netzooid.com
>>
>>
>
> ---
> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
> Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
>
>


-- 
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2005 13:41:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:10 GMT