- From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 01:07:44 -0500
- To: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
- Message-id: <43F02230.6040903@tibco.com>
Francisco Curbera wrote: >As I said in my earlier mail, this would be the text to include in section >3.5: > >"When the HTTP transport is in use, the anonymous URI is only used to >indicate the use of the HTTP reply channel so it can only appear as the >value of the [destination] property in reply messages." > > To be more concrete (insertions in italics): 3.5 Use of Anonymous Address in SOAP 3.5.1 SOAP 1.1/HTTP When "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" is specified for the response endpoint then there is no change to the SOAP 1.1/ HTTP binding./ The URI "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" MUST NOT be specified for the [destination] property of an HTTP message, except when required as a result of the rules in section 3.4 of the core. / 3.5.2 SOAP 1.2 When "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" is specified for the response endpoint and the request is the request part of a SOAP request-response MEP [soap 1.2 adjuncts ref], then any response MUST be the response part of the same SOAP request-response MEP [soap 1.2 adjuncts ref]. /The URI "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" MUST NOT be specified for the [destination] property of any message in a SOAP request-response MEP//, except when required as a result of the rules in section 3.4 of the core//. / This could be sharpened by saying the server/receiver MUST fault on receiving a message with such a [destination], instead of saying that such a [destination] MUST NOT be used but not saying what happens if it is.// >Paco > > > > > David Hull > <dmh@tibco.com> To: Francisco Curbera/Watson/IBM@IBMUS > Sent by: cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org > public-ws-addressing-req Subject: Re: CR20 proposal > uest@w3.org > > > 02/12/2006 02:22 PM > > > > > > >Francisco Curbera wrote: > > > >>As per Bob's request, and for easier reference, this is a more detailed >>version of the proposal for closing CR20 that we discussed on the last >>call: >> >>Middle of the road approach: retain the defaulting of the To header to >>anonymous, but re-state (in section 3.2 of the Core spec) that the use of >>the anonymous URI in the destination field is actually dependent on the >>interpretation that the transport binding gives to the anonymous URI. Add >> >> >a > > >>note in Section 3.5 of the SOAP spec indicating that for the case of the >>HTTP transport the anonymous URI is only used to indicate the use of the >>HTTP reply channel so it can only be used in reply messages. >> >> >> >> >Could you please state this in the form of an amendment to the text >accepted for section 3.5 in the resolution to CR 15 [1]? While this >text has not yet been incorporated into the editors' draft yet, I >believe it represents the latest draft of that section. > >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2006Jan/0085 > > > >>Paco >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 06:07:54 UTC