W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > February 2006

Re: CR20

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:19:48 -0500
To: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-id: <43E7D994.60902@tibco.com>
Francisco Curbera wrote:

>1. Restrict the defaulting of To to the anonymous URI to response messages
>only. This is fully consistent with the resolution of CR17, that restricts
>the defaulting of ReplyTo (to the "anonymous EPR") to request messages.
>Advantages: consistent approach to the use of defaults for optimizing the
>synch request response patter, but leaving other potential issues
>unmodified.
>  
>
The proposal 3 currently on the table builds on the same notion of
consistency, but I don't think this notion necessarily follows in either
case.  In the case of reply-to: we limited the handling of anonymous to
request messages because reply-to: only has a natural meaning at all in
request messages.  That's not to say that one couldn't define further
meanings, just that there's no single obvious way to do so.

>From the resolutions of CR17 and i067/i068/cr 15, it seems pretty clear
that all we're saying is that an anonymous response endpoint occurs in
the context of a SOAP request-response MEP, it means to use the response
message of the MEP.  We don't /disallow/ it in other circumstances
(whatever those may be).  Note also that we handle SOAP 1.1/HTTP and
SOAP 1.2/everything separately.

The most consistent way to extend this to [destination] would be to
state what anonymous [destination] /does/ mean in a given set of
circumstances.  There doesn't seem to be any controversy that for a
response message, anonymous [destination] would mean use the response
message of a request response MEP.  Saying this doesn't /disallow/ other
meanings elsewhere, any more than talking about reply-to: in requests
disallowed anything else.

Beyond that, we /might/ say that anonymous [destination] for requests
means the destination URL of a SOAP 1.1/HTTP request, or that anonymous
[destination] for any SOAP 1.2 message is the ImmediateDestination
property if it's defined, or we might leave it undefined.

Whatever we say, to be consistent with the resolutions we've already
decided, we should handle SOAP 1.1/HTTP and SOAP 1.2/everything separately.
Received on Monday, 6 February 2006 23:21:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:11 GMT