W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > October 2006

RE: Clarification needed on HTTP Transfer Coding

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:18:41 -0700
To: "'John Kaputin \(gmail\)'" <jakaputin@gmail.com>
Cc: <woden-dev@ws.apache.org>, "John Kaputin" <KAPUTIN@uk.ibm.com>, <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003a01c6f147$21d02920$3901a8c0@DELLICIOUS>
Thanks for your comment.  The WS Description Working Group tracked this
issue as a CR055 [1].


The Working Group accepted your proposed fix [2], along with additional work
[3], and has been implemented in the latest editor's draft [4, 5].


Unless you let us know otherwise by the end of October, we will assume you
agree with the resolution of this issue.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR055 

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Sep/0004.html

[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2006Sep/0008.html




Jonathan Marsh -  <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com -
<http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com



From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of John Kaputin (gmail)
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 5:13 AM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Cc: woden-dev@ws.apache.org; John Kaputin
Subject: Clarification needed on HTTP Transfer Coding


Can someone please clarify some points about the http transer coding
extension properties defined in Part 2 section 6.8.2 Relationship to WSDL
Component Model [1]?

It says the Binding has a {http transfer coding default} property that is
available to InterfaceMessageReference and InterfaceFaultReference
components. Is this worded correctly? Do components from the abstract
interface need http binding information?

It also says BindingOperation has a {http transfer coding default} property
that is available to BindingMessageReference and BindingFault components. Is
'BindingFault' a mistake, should this say BindingFaultReference?

There are no semantic rules about the relationship between the two {http
transfer coding default}  properties (i.e. in Binding and BindingOperation),
so they could potentially be different. I don't think this would make sense,
but it seems to be possible according to the way this section is described.

Finally, there are no semantic rules about the relationship between
BindingOperation's {http transfer coding default} property and the {http
transfer coding} properties if its two child components. As an implementor I
can infer what that relationship might be, but it would be better if the
spec stated in explicitly as it does for default and actual extension
properties elsewhere.


John Kaputin.
Received on Monday, 16 October 2006 17:18:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:05:58 UTC