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

RE: Wordsmithing for SOAP 1.1 request optional response HTTP Binding.

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:16:44 -0800
Message-ID: <2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D64165011115C0@uspale20.pal.sap.corp>
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>, "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

Folks, 

I need to be able to send the evolving SOAP 1.1 request optional
response HTTP binding internally. 

It would actually help me if there was one- URL to state the current
state of the document, instead of the email. 

Dave, could you send the document as it is today as a separate
attachment so that I can get this into internal circulation to folks who
are NOT in ws-A and do not care to read the whole email correspondence. 

Thanks. 

--umit
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> David Orchard
> Sent: Tuesday, Feb 14, 2006 2:55 PM
> To: Anish Karmarkar; Marc Hadley
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Wordsmithing for SOAP 1.1 request optional 
> response HTTP Binding.
> 
> 
> Nothing is simple.  I'm certainly not trying to break/extend/redefine
> the SOAP format.  
> 
> I can live with SOAP Envelope.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 11:26 AM
> > To: Marc Hadley
> > Cc: David Orchard; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Wordsmithing for SOAP 1.1 request optional 
> response HTTP
> > Binding.
> > 
> > Yes, I was getting a little sloppy with wordings there.
> > I assumed Dave was trying to highlight *non-empty* SOAP 
> Body and that
> is
> > what I meant.
> > 
> > -Anish
> > --
> > 
> > Marc Hadley wrote:
> > > On Feb 13, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Anish Karmarkar wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> No sure what you meant by 'SOAP Envelope or SOAP Body'.
> > >> If we say 'SOAP Envelope' that would cover SOAP Body, SOAP header
> > >> block(s) or both. Unless you explicitly wanted to prevent a SOAP
> Body.
> > >>
> > > Whilst not wishing to nit-pick I think its worth pointing 
> out that a
> > > SOAP Envelope has to have a SOAP Body, its not optional.
> > >
> > > Marc.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> David Orchard wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Well, I had meant to say SOAP body, to point out that 
> it might be
> > just
> > >>> header blocks coming back..  Perhaps I should say "SOAP Envelope
> or
> > >>> SOAP
> > >>> Body"...
> > >>> I agree with the 2nd ed comment :-)
> > >>> Dave
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com]
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 12:55 PM
> > >>>> To: David Orchard
> > >>>> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> > >>>> Subject: Re: Wordsmithing for SOAP 1.1 request 
> optional response
> > HTTP
> > >>>> Binding.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 2 editorial (I hope) comments below.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -Anish
> > >>>> --
> > >>>>
> > >>>> David Orchard wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I had an action to wordsmith the new binding around 
> "response".
> My
> > >>>
> > >>> best
> > >>>
> > >>>>> attempt is:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This SOAP 1.1 request optional response HTTP binding, in
> > conjunction
> > >>>>> with the SOAP 1.1 binding, can be used for sending request
> messages
> > >>>
> > >>> with
> > >>>
> > >>>>> an optional SOAP response.  This binding augments the SOAP 1.1
> > >>>
> > >>> binding
> > >>>
> > >>>>> by allowing that the HTTP [RFC 2616] response MAY have a 202
> status
> > >>>
> > >>> code
> > >>>
> > >>>>> and the response body MAY be empty.  Note that the HTTP [RFC
> 2616]
> > >>>>> specification states "the 202 response is intentionally
> > >>>
> > >>> non-committal".
> > >>>
> > >>>>> As such, any content in the response body, including a SOAP
> body,
> > >>>
> > >>> MAY or
> > >>>
> > >>>> s/SOAP body/SOAP Envelope/
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> MAY not be an expected SOAP response.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> s/MAY not/MAY NOT/
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Old text:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This SOAP 1.1 request optional response HTTP binding 
> can be used
> > for
> > >>>>> sending request messages with an optional response. For such
> > >>>
> > >>> messages,
> > >>>
> > >>>>> the HTTP [RFC 2616]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> <file:///C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\dorchard\Local%20Settings
> > >>> \Tempora
> > >>> ry
> > >>> %20Internet%20Files\OLK6
> > >>> \soap11reqoptresphttpbinding.html#RFC2616#RFC261
> > >>> 6>
> > >>>
> > >>>>> response MUST be a 202 status code and the response 
> body MAY be
> > >>>
> > >>> empty.
> > >>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Cheers,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Dave
> > >>>>>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
> > > Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
> > >
> > >
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2006 18:13:39 GMT

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