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

FW: Turning off http transfer coding

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 11:28:10 -0800
To: "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jonathan@wso2.com>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <010b01c75200$992d50f0$3501a8c0@DELLICIOUS>
FTR, the Working Group this issue as a CR087 [1], and fixed it in the latest
editor's draft [2].

 

I agree with the resolution.

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR087 

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

 

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 Jonathan Marsh
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 8:20 AM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Turning off http transfer coding

 

I presume omitting the {http transfer coding} property results in no content
coding being specified.  How do I get that behavior if there is an {http
transfer coding default} in effect?

 

Namely, is an empty value allowed for whttp:transferCoding and
whttp:transferCodingDefault?  

 

  <binding . whttp:transferCodingDefault="gzip">

    <operation . wtthp:transferCodingDefault="">

 

A literal read says the value has to be a transfer coding token (which
doesn't include an empty string).  It's also not clear whether an
implementation will attempt to specify an empty transfer coding in this
case, or whether it will simply ignore the transfer coding property
completely.

 

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

 

 
Received on Friday, 16 February 2007 19:28:12 GMT

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