W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > October 2008

MUST implementations require WS-Addressing if valid policy expression is present?

From: Karr, David <david.karr@wamu.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:39:18 -0700
Message-ID: <0C260F619E428642BFA6380177C3ADF30714D031@exmsea005.us.wamu.net>
To: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
I apologize if this isn't the best place to ask about this.  It's
certainly not the most active. :)

I've recently been reading Thomas Erl's new book, "Web Service Contract
Design and Versioning for SOA".  I was especially  interested in
learning how I can specify in a WSDL that the request message to the
service MUST include WS-Addressing headers, and specific values at that
(like the "wsa:Action" value).

Following the guidelines in the book, I constructed a simple WSDL that
(I believe) includes the relevant incantations.  In WebLogic Workshop
10.3, I generated a web service from that WSDL, and then tested it on
the server.  It tested fine, but there was not a trace of WS-Addressing
anywhere.  The WebLogic documentation states that WS-Addressing and
WS-Policy are "fully supported".  I take the fact that that is the sole
reference anywhere in their documentation to either of these
specifications to be a clear indication of what "fully supported" means.
My experience appears to bear that out, although it's entirely possible
I've made some mistake in the WSDL specification (although nothing is
complaining to me).

I'm attaching the WSDL I used for this test.  I'd appreciate it if you
could take a look at it and verify for me whether I've correctly
specified the policy.

What I'm not really sure about is whether the specification really says
implementations MUST do something useful with this information, or
whether it results in a SHOULD advice.  Is my experience with WebLogic
unique, or common?  What do other frameworks do with this?


By the way, I noticed that the following schema has a "raw" reference to
"wsp:Policy", without a namespace specification.  SOATest complains
about this.  Is it really valid to do what this is doing?


Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 04:41:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:17 UTC