W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org > September 2006

[Bug 3656] Using UsingAddressing Extension Element as a WS-Policy assertion

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 18:57:34 +0000
To: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1GKg74-0001Vk-Cu@wiggum.w3.org>


           Summary: Using UsingAddressing Extension Element as a WS-Policy
           Product: WS-Policy
           Version: CR
          Platform: PC
               URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ws-addr-wsdl-
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Primer
        AssignedTo: plh@w3.org
        ReportedBy: plh@w3.org
         QAContact: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org

The Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding specification mentions the
3.1.2 Other Uses of UsingAddressing Extension Element

The wsaw:UsingAddressing element MAY also be used in other contexts (e.g., as a
policy assertion in a policy framework). Its use and that of related elements
and attributes including wsaw:Anonymous (see 3.2 Anonymous Element ) and
wsaw:Action (see 4.4.1 Explicit Association) in such contexts is semantically
equivalent to the use of wsaw:UsingAddressing as a WSDL extension.

Note that the association of wsaw:UsingAddressing to WSDL constructs where the
wsaw:UsingAddressing WSDL extension element is not allowed is not meaningful.
Section 3.1.2 Other Uses of UsingAddressing Extension Element

Should the WS-Policy Working Group request at least a non-normative reference
to Web Services Policy 1.5 from the Addressing WSDL Binding specification?
Right now, people might not realize that there is a link between the WSDL
Binding documentation and Web Services Policy. Should the Addressing WG go
beyond what is currently specified or is it considered enough?

Should there be an example of the use of the UsingAddressing element in one of
the WS-Policy document (Primer?)?

Is it considered harmful to allow the use of UsingAddressing both as a WSDL
extension and as a policy assertion? What is the expectation if those two are
used simultaneously?
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 2006 18:57:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:09 UTC