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

Text for "except as a consequence of section 3.4"

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:01:24 -0500
To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-id: <43FB7FA4.50300@tibco.com>
You always find it in the last place you look ...

In [1] I proposed text for defining "underlying response message" and
generally tried to separate out the various issues.  At the bottom I
proposed that CR 18 could be resolved by the following text.  Note that
the bulk of the second paragraph is Paul's by way of Anish:

When such an anonymous response endpoint is used for a response, the rules in
section 3.4 of the WS-Addressing Core dictate that the [destination] property
of the response MUST be "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous".  In
this case, the anonymous address refers to the use of the underlying response
message.

Outside of this usage, this specification assigns no particular 
semantics to the use of "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous"
for the [destination] property in this binding.

This would go right after the description of anonymous in response
endpoints.  Note that "refers to the use of the underlying response
message" assumes that "underlying response message" is defined.  If not,
rephrase in terms of "back-channel" or whatever else we come up with.

Ümit also points out that "response endpoint" is only defined in the
WSDL doc.  The definition as "the [reply endpoint] and [fault endpoint]
message addressing properties collectively" is generic and could
probably usefully move to the core.  This seems editorial, but if we
need to track it as a CR issue I suppose we can.

[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2006Feb/0140.html
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 21:01:33 GMT

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