- From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 23:00:59 -0700
- To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- CC: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
David Hull wrote: > ... I think I finally put my finger on the other reason I don't like > about keying "WSA is engaged" off of [action] instead of any wsa: header. > > As I understand it, the reasoning is that, since [action] is required > and non-defaulting (and, as it happens, the only such), its presence > indicates that the intent was to to engage WSA. But the implication is > backwards. Intending to engage WSA implies wsa:Action (as it happens), > but not vice versa. The students at the Aveda institute downstairs of > our office are evidently required to wear all-black, but wearing > all-black does not imply that one is studying cosmetology (one might > instead be playing rugby for New Zealand, or one might just like black). > Exactly! That is why at the last f2f I was arguing for keying-off any WSA header instead of only wsa:Action. If a WSA header is present but wsa:Action is not present, that is a good reason to generate the predefined fault. The presence of any WSA header makes the intent clear. > Be that as it may, I accept that the issue is settled. > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 06:01:08 UTC