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

Action item for cr23: cr15 resolution nullified cr4 resolution: UPDATED proposed text

From: Katy Warr <katy_warr@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:00:30 +0000
To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Cc: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>, Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <OFCAF9E4F8.DDF78548-ON80257122.0035797E-80257122.00477116@uk.ibm.com>
All, 

Based on the on-going discussions on the mailing list, I'd like to replace 
the proposed text for action item cr23 with the following.   This improves 
the text by specifying anonymous URI behaviour in terms of the 'context' 
in which it is used but retains the same intent as the original proposal. 
This updated text is also applicable to the editors' draft - hence 
incorporates 5.1.1 and 5.1.2.

Thanks to David Hull and Chris Ferris for this.

> 5.1 Use of Anonymous Address in SOAP 
> The "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" URI MAY be 
> specified as the [address] of an EPR to designate that the target 
> endpoint is reached by a means provided by the underlying SOAP 
> protocol binding.  The exact destination to which the "http://www.
> w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" URI refers is determined 
> relative to a given context.  This context will depend on the 
> semantics of the EPR in question.
> 
> In the case of the response endpoints and the [destination] MAP, the
> context is a single instance of a request-response message exchange. 
> In particular:
> 
> [existing text for section 5.1, repeated here for completeness] 
> 5.1.1 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. 
> 5.1.2 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 message exchange [SOAP 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts], 
> then any response MUST be the response part of the same SOAP 
> request-response message exchange [SOAP 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts]. 

ALSO 
> To resolve the dangling reference to "response endpoint", 
> we should move that definition from the WSDL doc to the core.

Katy

----- Forwarded by Katy Warr/UK/IBM on 27/02/2006 09:44 -----

Katy Warr/UK/IBM@IBMGB 
Sent by: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
22/02/2006 11:04

To
"public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
cc

Subject
Action item for cr23: cr15 resolution nullified cr4 resolution: proposed 
text







Further to my action on Monday to propose resolution text for CR23, here 
is a suggestion.  I've tried to maintain the previously agreed text from 
CR4 and CR15 where possible.   

The intention is that the first paragraph enables the use of anonymous EPR 
in semantics including (but not exclusive to) replyTo and faultTo (such as 
WS-RX acksTo).  This satisfies CR4. 

The second paragraph gives the semantics specific to replyTo/faultTo - 
this is very similar to the resolution of CR15 but specific to the 
replyTo/faultTo scenario so that it does not undo the resolution to CR4 in 
the first paragraph. 

This text is applicable to section 5.1 of the SOAP binding document. 

------------------------- 
The "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" URI MAY be specified 
as
the [address] of an EPR to designate that the target endpoint is 
reached by a channel of the underlying SOAP protocol binding.
The specification of the channel to which the 
"http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" URI refers depends on the 

Message Exchange Pattern (MEP) and on the 
defined semantics of the EPR in question.  Any underlying protocol binding 
supporting the SOAP
request-response MEP provides such a channel for
response messages. 
 
In the context of a SOAP request-response MEP, sending a response message 
to a 
ReplyTo or FaultTo 
EPR whose [address] is "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/anonymous" 
means sending it as the response message of the MEP. 
For instance, the SOAP 1.2 HTTP binding[SOAP 1.2 Part 2: Adjuncts] 
puts the reply message in the HTTP response. 
-------------------------- 

We may be able to omit the sentence:  " Any underlying protocol binding 
supporting the SOAP
request-response MEP provides such a channel for
response messages. " 

This second paragraph requires restructure to fit with the SOAP 1.1/HTTP 
and SOAP 1.2 split in the editors' 
draft.  I suggest that we defer this until we have reached agreement on 
the general structure of the text above. 

thanks 
Katy
Received on Monday, 27 February 2006 13:00:34 GMT

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