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

Re: SOAPAction and Default Action

From: Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:33:51 -0700
Message-ID: <44C004CF.6010304@webmethods.com>
To: Arun Gupta <Arun.Gupta@Sun.COM>
CC: W3C WS-Addressing Public List <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Hi Arun,

Since it says "where a SOAPAction value is specified",  I tend to think 
it covers #2 also, as a value had not been specified for SOAPAction, 
considering empty string is not a "value". I agree however that it would 
be clearer to exclude SOAPAction empty string case explicitly.

Regards,
Prasad

Arun Gupta wrote:

>
> Section 4.4.1 of WSDL Binding [1] says:
>
> -- cut here --
> In the absence of a wsaw:Action attribute on a WSDL input element 
> where a SOAPAction value is specified, the value of the [action] 
> property for the input message is the value of the SOAPAction specified.
> -- cut here --
>
> Consider the following 3 different SOAP bindings for an operation in 
> WSDL 1.1:
>
> 1). <soap:operation soapAction="bindingSOAPAction"/>
>
> 2). <soap:operation soapAction=""/>
>
> 3). <soap:operation/>
>
> In 1)., SOAPAction is clearly specified. In 3). SOAPAction is clearly 
> not specified. Should 2). be considered as specified or not specified ?
>
> A literal reading of the spec will mean that SOAPAction is specified, 
> even though blank. I've seen 2). as a more common style in WSDLs. If 
> there happens to more than one operation in a portType (not uncommon 
> at all) and all the operation use 2)., then all the operations will 
> have exactly same wsa:Action within a portType.
>
> I think the wording of the spec should be changed to specify that only 
> a non-empty SOAPAction overrides the default Action.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ws-addr-wsdl-20060529/#explicitaction
>
> Thanks,
> -Arun
Received on Thursday, 20 July 2006 22:34:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:13 GMT