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

current best practice for using WS-Addressing in WSDL 1.1?

From: Aleksander Slominski <aslom@cs.indiana.edu>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 12:24:26 -0500
Message-ID: <42A729CA.4060206@cs.indiana.edu>
To: "soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com" <soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org
CC: www-ws-desc@w3.org

hi,

i wonder what is the (current) best practice to describe in WSDL 1.1 
that a service endpoint supports WS-Addressing (and in particular that 
it may send response as one-way message to ReplyTo/FaultTo address)?

i checked "Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding"
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050413/#wsdl11requestresponse
but i still have not idea how to do it ...

consider echo operation that takes echoString and echoStringResponse

    <portType name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
        <operation name="echoString">
            <input message="tns:echoString" name="echoString"/>
            <output message="tns:echoStringResponse" 
name="echoStringResponse"/>
        </operation>
    </portType>

how can i annotate it to indicate that output message may be 
asynchronous - or should i do this in binding as it is a transport detail?

    <binding name="WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortBinding"
        type="tns:WSDLInteropTestDocLitPortType">
        <soap:binding style="document" 
transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"/>
        <operation name="echoString">
            <soap:operation soapAction="http://soapinterop.org/" 
style="document"/>
            <input name="echoString">
                <soap:body 
namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
                    use="literal"/>
            </input>
            <output name="echoStringResponse">
                <soap:body 
namespace="http://soapinterop.org/WSDLInteropTestDocLit"
                    use="literal"/>
            </output>
        </operation>
    </binding>
 
i think that for now i can use a little heuristics:  if i see 
portType/operation@wsa:Action then i successfully detected that it is 
safe to send WS-Addressing message one way with ReplyTo/FaultTo headers 
- however is it the best i can do? what about services that are 
WSA-enabled but use Default Action Pattern?

what about some general extension (feature) for WSDL 1.1 to indicate 
that one-way messaging transport is required (possible)? or that 
WS-Addressing is supported?

let me now if i missed something.

thanks,

alek

-- 
The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2005 17:25:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:05 GMT