Minimal change proposal for Core Spec to reflect agreements from 3/7 Teleconference Call

 

These proposals, which are intended to convey a minimal change, assume we retain the definition of the anonymous address.

 

As an alternative, one could reformulate alternative proposals which get rid of the uri for anonymous, but result in the same semantics as that resulting from the proposals below.  However, this would require repeating the equivalent of the “definition of anonymous” in the definitions for wsa:To and wsa:ReplyTo. 

 

I leave this exercise for another email. 

 

There was general agreement to align the text for wsa:ReplyTo with that of wsa:To.

 

Current text for wsa:To:

“

/wsa:To

This OPTIONAL element (of type xs:anyURI) provides the value for the [destination] property. If this element is NOT present then the value of the [destination] property is "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/role/anonymous". Otherwise the [children] of this element convey the value of this property.

“

 

Proposal 1):

Change:

“

/wsa:ReplyTo

This OPTIONAL element (of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType) provides the value for the [reply endpoint] property. This element MUST be present if a reply is expected. If this element is present, wsa:MessageID MUST be present.

“

To:

“

/wsa:ReplyTo

This OPTIONAL element (of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType) provides the value for the [reply endpoint] property. If this element is NOT present then the value of the [reply endpoint] property is "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/role/anonymous". Otherwise the [children] of this element convey the value of this property.  If this element is present, wsa:MessageID MUST be present.

“

 

 

There was also general agreement to have fault to default to the value for replyto:

 

Proposal 2):

Change:

“

/wsa:FaultTo

This OPTIONAL element (of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType) provides the value for the [fault endpoint] property. If this element is present, wsa:MessageID MUST be present.

“

to

“

/wsa:FaultTo

This OPTIONAL element (of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType) provides the value for the [fault endpoint] property. If this element is NOT present then the value of the [fault endpoint] property is the same as the value of the [reply endpoint] property. If this element is present, wsa:MessageID MUST be present.

“

 

There is also a need to tweak the corresponding abstract property text in section 3, since we have introduced the default semantics in the wsa:replyTo and wsa:FaultTo elements.: 

 

Proposal 3):

Change:

“

[reply endpoint] : endpoint reference (0..1)

An endpoint reference for the intended receiver for replies to this message. If a reply is expected, a message MUST contain a [reply endpoint]. The sender MUST use the contents of the [reply endpoint] to formulate the reply message as defined in 3.2 Formulating a Reply Message. If this property is present, the [message id] property is REQUIRED.

[fault endpoint] : endpoint reference (0..1)

An endpoint reference for the intended receiver for faults related to this message. When formulating a fault message as defined in 3.2 Formulating a Reply Message, the sender MUST use the contents of the [fault endpoint], when present, of the message being replied to to formulate the fault message. If this property is present, the [message id] property is REQUIRED.

“

to:

“

[reply endpoint] : endpoint reference (0..1)

An endpoint reference for the intended receiver for replies to this message. The sender MUST use the contents of the [reply endpoint] to formulate the reply message as defined in 3.2 Formulating a Reply Message.

[fault endpoint] : endpoint reference (0..1)

An endpoint reference for the intended receiver for faults related to this message. When formulating a fault message as defined in 3.2 Formulating a Reply Message, the sender MUST use the contents of the [fault endpoint], of the message being replied to, to formulate the fault message.

“