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

Re: SOAP 1.1 One-way HTTP Binding doc

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:33:46 -0500
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: "WS-Addressing" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF7F915263.8975C71E-ON852570FC.00650AC9-852570FC.0065F72C@us.ibm.com>


I have *significant* heartburn with this as it precludes the use case of 
sending a
WS-RM SequenceAcknowledgement (or other infrastructure-level signal) as a
SOAP envelope in the HTTP response.

The use case is considered to be of critical importance to a number of 
with which I have dealt who want to leverage WS-RM for both oneway and 
request response message flows between business partners.

This proposed binding simply carries forward the mistake that the WS-I BP 
made with R2714 and R2750 (which I argued against at the time).

I've got another post still in draft responding to another thread on this 
that I will be sending shortly.



Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=440
phone: +1 508 377 9295

public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 01/20/2006 01:09:47 PM:

> Here's an xml spec xml and html version of a one-way HTTP Binding.
> Cheers,
> Dave[attachment "soap11onewayhttpbinding.xml" deleted by Christopher
> B Ferris/Waltham/IBM] [attachment "soap11onewayhttpbinding.html" 
> deleted by Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM] 
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 18:34:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:12 UTC