W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > February 2007

RE: LocationTemplate-1G totally hosed ;-)

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 11:05:53 -0800
To: "'Youenn Fablet'" <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <010901c751fd$7cc68830$3501a8c0@DELLICIOUS>

Thank you for the comment.  The Working Group this issue as a CR148 [1].

The latest editor's draft [2] makes it clear that SOAP Action has no effect
on SOAP Response MEPs. 

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#CR148
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20.html?content-
type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#Interface_details

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Youenn Fablet [mailto:youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr]
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 6:58 AM
> To: Jonathan Marsh
> Cc: 'www-ws-desc'
> Subject: Re: LocationTemplate-1G totally hosed ;-)
> 
> Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> > I found this in the SOAP spec:
> >
> > If the http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/features/action/Action property
> has a
> > value at a SOAP sender utilizing a binding supporting this feature, the
> > sender MUST use the property value as the value of the action parameter
> in
> > the media type designator. [1]
> >
> > So to answer my own question, I think there's a pretty strong
> implication
> > that the Content-Type header should be set to application/soap+xml, and
> > include the action parameter, when the soap-response mep is used and the
> > action is specified, for instance in MessageTest-4G:
> >
> I agree with the implication and think it makes a lot of sense, although
> I am unclear about the MAY/SHOULD/MUST state of the implication.
> 
> >   <operation ref="tns:EchoString2"
> >     wsoap:mep="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/soap-response/"
> >     wsoap:action="http://example.org/message-test/action/EchoString2">
> >
> > FWIW, (and after I'd concluded the above) I found that Axis2 currently
> > inserts the media type with action as above, although as of now it
> doesn't
> > correctly dispatch using the action in this case.
> >
> Canon and Axis2 implementations seem to have the same behaviour on this
> one :)
> Should we add an assertion in the exchange test-suite checking that if
> content-type is set in the GET request,
> it must be application/soap+xml and action value equal to the specified
> value ?
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/#actionstatemachine
> >
> > 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 Jonathan Marsh
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 3:22 PM
> >> To: 'Youenn Fablet'
> >> Cc: 'www-ws-desc'
> >> Subject: RE: LocationTemplate-1G totally hosed ;-)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>> I forgot about the SOAP Response MEP - must be some jetlag.  Nothing
> >>>>
> >>> with an
> >>>
> >>>> application/soap+xml media type will add uncited parameters, but I
> >>>>
> >> guess
> >>
> >>>> that doesn't include the SOAP Response MEP which doesn't have a media
> >>>>
> >>> type
> >>>
> >>>> on the request.  But in that case something is still broken:  {http
> >>>>
> >>> ignore
> >>>
> >>>> uncited} isn't among the parameters listed as supported by the SOAP
> >>>>
> >>> binding.
> >>>
> >>>> It doesn't appear in the interchange format, so it shouldn't really
> >>>>
> >> have
> >>
> >>>> been available for you to use to pass that testcase!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I am still unsure of the relationship between application/soap+xml and
> >>> uncited parameters.
> >>> Are you referring to section 6.7/table 6-5?
> >>> Anyway, in the SOAP-Response case, the media-type may be omitted
> within
> >>> the request, but it may also be added.
> >>> It may be especially useful if soap action has been specified and will
> >>> help the server.
> >>> Are you suggesting that depending on this implementation choice,
> >>> parameters should or should not be added to the request URL?
> >>>
> >> I tried to clarify this at [1].  The media type of a soap-response MEP
> >> request doesn't appear to affect the generation of query parameters.
> >>
> >> I don't think either the WSDL Adjuncts spec nor the SOAP Adjuncts spec
> >> says
> >> anything explicit about which media type to use for a soap-response
> MEP,
> >> so
> >> you may be right that one could use application/soap+xml even though
> the
> >> body is empty.
> >>
> >> Is there an implication that when there is a {soap action} that
> >> application/soap+xml is used?
> >>
> >> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2007Jan/0141.html
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 19:05:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:33 GMT