- From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:46:11 -0800
- To: "'youenn fablet'" <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>
- Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Thank you for this comment. The Working Group tracked this issue as a CR111 [1]. The latest editor's draft [2] specifies 202 for the response to in-only, and 204 for the response to robust-in-only. Unless you let us know otherwise within 2 weeks, we will assume you agree with the resolution of this issue. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR111 [2] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html ?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#http-operation-decl-dest Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of youenn fablet > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:55 AM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: Mapping WSDL meps to the HTTP binding > > > Reading the HTTP binding specification I have the following comment. > Currently the mapping from WSDL meps to HTTP binding messages is > described in section 6.4.1. > Basically it says that the wsdl input message is the http request > message and the wsdl output message, if any is the http response message. > I wonder whether this description is sufficient for the inonly and > especially robust-inonly wsdl meps. > At least, we might need to specify the HTTP code to use in the response, > especially for the robust-inonly. > Should it be 200, 202 or left unspecified as it is currently? > Are there other things that need to be specified? > What do you think? > Youenn
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2007 23:46:15 UTC