RE: LC 76 - What makes a msg WS-A?

 


________________________________

	From: David Hull [mailto:dmh@tibco.com] 
	Sent: 14 July 2005 16:32
	To: Martin Gudgin
	Cc: Katy Warr; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
	Subject: Re: LC 76 - What makes a msg WS-A?
	
	
	Is this really a question of how to support both WSA and
old-style HTTP requests on the same endpoint?  
	[MJG] I don't know, I didn't ask the original question.
	
	  I.e., if I don't see any WSA headers at all, I assume it's an
old-style request and act accordingly, but if I see anything WSA, I
follow the rules in section 3? 
	[MJG] I guess one could do that... 
	
	The tricky bit is that, since MAPs like [destination] and [reply
endpoint] can default, a message with no wsa: elements on the wire could
still be assigned values for some of its MAPs, since the infoset will
still have values for the corresponding elements. 
	[MJG] Which Infoset are you talking about? The XML Infoset has
no such values.
	
	   So either we have to drop down to look at the infoset level,
and in particular at the non-defaulted elements in the infoset, or we
have to find some marker that can't be defaulted away.  This is why the
[action] property looks significant here.  But on the other hand, what
if I include a wsa:ReplyTo element and no action?  By the "it's WSA iff
[action] is present" rule, that's not a WSA message and therefore not an
error.  This seems wrong. 
	[MJG] Why does it seem wrong? 
	
	Put another way, when would one get a fault for omitting
[action]? 
	[MJG] Whenever another wsa: header is present in a message. 
	
	Martin Gudgin wrote: 

		Given that the wsa:Action is mandatory, isn't it the
presence of that header?
		 
		Gudge


________________________________

			From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Katy Warr
			Sent: 14 July 2005 16:07
			To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
			Subject: LC 76 - What makes a msg WS-A?
			
			

			Please could we discuss the following in the
context of LC76? 
			
			When is an incoming message deemed to be a
WS-Addressing message and therefore subject to the appropriate
WS-Addressing validation?   Is it based on the presence of any
WS-addressing Message Addressing Property?  For example, does a message
containing a reference parameter (but no other WS-Addressing
information) need to result in a MessageAddressingHeaderRequired?    Or,
for example, does the declaration of the wsa namespace rendor the
message WS-Addressing? 
			
			Thanks 
			Katy