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

SOAP binding issues

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:27:54 -0400
To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-id: <42E54B4A.2090204@tibco.com>
As with the core issues I sent, none of these is a showstopper.

    * The boilerplate in section 1.1 is out of sync with the core.  In
      particular, there is no "for brevity we leave out open content
      stuff" disclaimer.
    * The names we give for the SOAP feature and module,
      "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/feature" and
      "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/module" are SOAP-centric. 
      Other IRIs of this form are generic, but these aren't generic. 
      They might be better named
      "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing//SOAP-/feature" and
      "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing//SOAP-/module".
    * In section 3.4, we still mention xs: explicitly, in "whose value
      is a valid xs:boolean representaion of "true"".  Just what
      constitutes a valid representation presumably varies, so this
      might better read "whose value is a valid xs:boolean
      representation of "true"." (representation was also misspelt).
    * In the discussion of faults before section 5.1, "The English
      language reason element, use of the specified fault code is
      RECOMMENDED but alternate text MAY be used." I think we mean "The
      English language reason element. Use of the specified fault code
      /reason /is RECOMMENDED but alternate text MAY be used."  This is
      also one of several places where a comma should be replaced by a
      period (full list available if anyone cares)
    * In section 5.3.4, describing "Problem Action", it seems clearer to
      change "An optional element that provides the [action] that caused
      the problem." to "An optional element that provides the [action]
      /of the message /that caused the problem." and likewise for
      wsa:SoapAction.  In the case of a mismatch, you can't really say
      which one caused the problem.
    * In section 6, we now have two predefined IRIs, so "Messages that
      use wsa:ReplyTo or wsa:FaultTo headers whose [address] is not the
      predefined anonymous URI [...]" should read "Messages that use
      wsa:ReplyTo or wsa:FaultTo headers whose [address] is not the /one
      of the IRIs /predefined /in section 2.1 of the WSA Core
      specification."/ or words to that effect.
Received on Monday, 25 July 2005 20:27:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:06 GMT