RE: i67 and i68 proposal for WSDL doc

And I believe that you won't get to consensus on making 3.4.2 soap 1.2
HTTP specific.  At least 3 people have objected to that notion.

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francisco Curbera [mailto:curbera@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 3:22 PM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: WS-Addressing; public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> Subject: RE: i67 and i68 proposal for WSDL doc
> 
> Text along these lines would be clearer. I also think 3.4.2 should be
HTTP
> specific (and I updated the text accordingly).
> 
> =================================================
> 
> 3.4.1 SOAP 1.1/HTTP binding
> 
> WS-Addressing changes the SOAP 1.1/HTTP binding used when the value of
the
> response endpoint EPR contains an address different from the
WS-Addressing
> anonymous URI. In this case, the receiver of a message MUST use a
binding
> that supports not returning a SOAP envelope in the HTTP response (such
as
> [URI for binding doc]) unless a different behavior is mandated for the
URI
> specified in the response endpoint EPR address by another
specification
> that is supported by the endpoint.  Absent such a requirement by
another
> specification, if the value of the response endpoint EPR contains an
> address that is different from the WS-Addressing anonymous URI, then
the
> outbound message MUST be sent using a separate connection and using
the
> address value specified by response endpoint.
> 
> 3.4.2 SOAP 1.2/HTTP binding
> 
> When the value of the response endpoint EPR contains the anonymous
address
> and the request is the request part of a SOAP request-response MEP
[soap
> 1.2 adjuncts ref], then the response must be the response part the
same
> SOAP request-response MEP [soap 1.2 adjuncts ref].  When the value of
the
> response endpoint EPR contains a value different from the anonymous
> address
> then any response message is not part of the mep that the request
message
> is in.