Re: Agenda: 2005-02-08 Async TF telcon

Hi Glen,

It seems like we are diving deep into the details of WSDL 2.0 changes 
before we have figured out the usecases/requirements that we want to 
support (Greg's presentation did attempt to get to the 
usecases/scenarios -- but I'm not sure if the TF agreed on anything). I 
did not attend the 1st TF meeting (although I did not see anything in 
the minutes) and perhaps the TF did agree on use cases. If so apologies 
(pl. point me to the right email).

There seems to be three things that the TF needs to resolve:

1) Asynch use cases that we think are important and need to be addressed 
(pun-intended) in light of how WS-Addressing is (or expected to be) used.
2) SOAP over HTTP being the most important protocol here, how do things 
work for SOAP/HTTP (details of SOAP-MEP/SOAP-binding etc) for the 
usecases in (1) (Greg's presentation, Marc's email about polling). 
Resolving this may require definition of a new SOAP binding and/or SOAP 
MEP(s) (DaveO's presentation/proposal)
3) How are the usecases in(1) described in WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 1.2 
(Kevin's email/DaveO's presentation/Greg's presentation). This may 
require changes to WSDL 2.0 (Kevin's email) and/or definition of new 
things in WSDL 1.1.

Here are the usecases that I have heard on the call/emails/F2F:

1) One-way:
A client sends a SOAP message over HTTP to a service and does not get 
back a SOAP response (perhaps a 202 HTTP response status with no 
entity-body).
The WSDL 1.1/2.0 description of this operation/binding/message make it 
clear what the non-failure HTTP status code is and the fact that the 
HTTP entity-body is empty.

2) Callback:
a) A client sends a SOAP message over HTTP to a service. The client 
specifies the response address using WS-Addressing. The service's HTTP 
response does not contain an entity-body (perhaps a 202 HTTP response 
status). The service at a later point in time responds to the client 
using response address specified by the client by sending a SOAP msg 
over HTTP. The client responds with an empty HTTP entity-body in the 
HTTP response (and perhaps a 202 HTTP response status).
The WSDL 1.1/2.0 description of the callback operation/binding/message 
make it clear that the response is sent asynchronously (DaveO presented 
a bunch of options as to how this can be done wrt to the WSDL-MEPs and 
SOAP-MEPs)
b) Same as (a) but the SOAP response is send using a protocol other than 
HTTP (perhaps SMTP).

3) Poll:
a) A client sends a SOAP message over HTTP to a service. The service's 
HTTP response does not contain an entity-body, but specifies where the 
location of the response is (perhaps using status code 303 and Location 
header per Marc's email). The client then polls for the response using 
the specified location.
The WSDL 1.1/2.0 description of the poll operation/binding make it clear 
that the client has to poll for the SOAP response from the service.

Are there other usecases that the aync tf should consider?

HTH.

-Anish
--

Glen Daniels wrote:
> W3C Web Services Asynchrony Task Force meeting agenda
>    Wednesday, 8 Feb
>    20:00-22:00 UTC & UK/London; 12:00-14:00 US/Pacific; 15:00-17:00 
> US/Eastern; 21:00-23:00 FR/Paris & CZ/Prague; 5:00-7:00 JP/Tokyo; 
> 6:00-8:00 AU/Brisbane
>    Dial-in information has been sent to the Member lists
> 
> I'd like the focus of this call to be scoping the task force's work,
> so that we can maximize our effectiveness in the next couple of
> weeks.
> 
> 1. Assign Scribe
> 2. Agenda Review, AOB
>    [AIs all complete, so no AI review]
> 3. Kevin's taxonomy of options [1]
> 4. Glen's "high order bit" question [2]
> 5. Collect "list of important questions", and discuss options/scoping
> 
> Thanks,
> --Glen
> 
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-async-tf/2005Feb/0022.html
> [2]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-async-tf/2005Feb/0028.html
>

Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 19:54:52 UTC