NEW ISSUE: Change optional example from MTOM to security (Guidelines and Primer) Bug 3952 - <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3952> Target: Guidelines, primer Justification: MTOM is a very bad example for optionality since it raises ambiguities depending on message flow.Bbest practices might suggest using different endpoints for with and without MTOM. Reason is that MTOM assertion mandates usage of MTOM on both requests and responses, so request without MTOM is ambiguous, is it a message that wouldn't naturally use MTOM, is it in error, or does it signal desire not to use MTOM. Proposal: Change to example using WS-SecurityPolicy, for example that messages optionally may need timestamp using Timestamp assertion. Test: review guidelines and primer. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch NokiaReceived on Saturday, 4 November 2006 16:02:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:43 GMT