W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access@w3.org > April 2009

Re: [issue 6432] - a modest proposal

From: David Snelling <David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:49:29 +0100
Cc: Gilbert Pilz <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com>, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>, Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Message-Id: <360C717E-0098-41AB-BEE4-EEE4299410CC@UK.Fujitsu.com>
To: Bob Freund <bob@freunds.com>

Bob,

Just a question of clarification:

Are you suggesting:

<Subscribe>
    <NotifyTo .../>
    <Delivery> xs:any </Delivery>
    <Format .../>
    <EndTo .../>
    <Expires .../>
    <Filter .../>
</Subscribe>

or

<Subscribe>
    <NotifyTo .../>
    <Format .../>
    <EndTo .../>
    <Expires .../>
    <Filter .../>
    xs:any
</Subscribe>

?


On 09 Apr 2009, at 16:32, Bob Freund wrote:

> Would it be too bold to suggest folks consider to move NotifyTo to  
> be a child of Subscribe?
> that way, then Delivery could be used (as an xs:Any) extension  
> point, used by other specifications to mean anything they want at at  
> cost of merely setting a SOAP mU header on delivery to get the fault  
> behavior.  Of course, the fault would change from modeNotRecognized  
> to SOAP mU Fault, but the other stuff would still work.
> Is that half-way-ish approach that folks could consider?
>
> On Apr 9, 2009, at 11:09 AM, David Snelling wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>> I will try this with colour:
>> <s:Envelope . . .>
>>   <s:Header>
>>     <wsa:Action>http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-evt/ 
>> Subscribe<wsa:Action>
>>     <wsa:MessageID>uuid:d7c5726b-de29-4313-b4d4-b3425b200839</ 
>> wsa:MessageID>
>>     <wsa:ReplyTo>
>>       <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous</ 
>> wsa:Address>
>>     </wsa:ReplyTo>
>>     <wsa:To>http://www.example.org/oceanwatch/EventSource</wsa:To>
>>   </s:Header>
>>   <s:Body>
>>     <wse:Subscribe>
>>       <wse:Delivery>
>>         <wse:NotifyTo>
>>           <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/ 
>> anonymous</wsa:Address>
>>         </wse:NotifyTo>
>>       </wse:Delivery>
>>     </wse:Subscribe>
>>   </s:Body>
>> </s:Envelope>
>>
>> Red: General SOAP layer.
>> Green: WSE Application Layer.
>> Blue: WS-Addressing infrastructure.
>>
>> OK the important point is that no matter what delivery model I want  
>> to use, I only change blue and red text. The beauty of Eventing is  
>> that the green XML stays the same across all the use cases we have  
>> discussed.
>>
>> For wse:Push: In the blue NotifyTo EPR include a sensible address.
>>
>> For wsman:PushWithAck: In the blue NotifyTo EPR include an address  
>> and possibly policy indicating reliable delivery required. This  
>> will means some more stuff will show up in red and possibly orange  
>> (for the reliable messaging) on the delivered messages.
>>
>> For wsman:Pull: In blue include either an MC special URI or the  
>> actual address of a WS-Notification Pull point.
>>
>> For wsman:Events: This is the same as wsman:PushWithAck which  
>> affects only the blue, red, and orange XML, but using a format  
>> provided by WS-Management V2.0 in some pink XML.
>>
>> Notice: No Green XML changes!!!
>>
>> In fact existing implementations have to change NOTHING in their  
>> semantics. They will need to understand the new namespace and learn  
>> not to look for the Mode attribute. The semantics of Eventing do  
>> not change.
>>
>> On 08 Apr 2009, at 20:08, Gilbert Pilz wrote:
>>
>>> I think that, in this context, the term "opaque" might be a red- 
>>> herring. The point is that a URI like "http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702/anonymous?id=1447d9c0-246a-11de-8c30-0800200c9a66 
>>> " requires neither more nor less understanding at the application  
>>> layer (in this case the component that processes wse:Subscribe  
>>> requests) than a URI like "http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous 
>>> " or "http://webservice.bea.com/ohai/lolcatz".
>>>
>>> I think part of the problem might be that we are all assuming  
>>> different processing models. Look at the following request and  
>>> tell me how you think it should be handled. If you could be  
>>> somewhat specific about which layer (ws-addr layer, general SOAP  
>>> layer, wse:Subscribe logic, etc.) does/checks what, that would be  
>>> helpful:
>>>  <s:Envelope . . .>
>>>   <s:Header>
>>>     <wsa:Action>http://www.w3.org/2009/02/ws-evt/ 
>>> Subscribe<wsa:Action>
>>>     <wsa:MessageID>uuid:d7c5726b-de29-4313-b4d4-b3425b200839</ 
>>> wsa:MessageID>
>>>     <wsa:ReplyTo>
>>>       <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous</ 
>>> wsa:Address>
>>>     </wsa:ReplyTo>
>>>     <wsa:To>http://www.example.org/oceanwatch/EventSource</wsa:To>
>>>   </s:Header>
>>>   <s:Body>
>>>     <wse:Subscribe>
>>>       <wse:Delivery>
>>>         <wse:NotifyTo>
>>>           <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous 
>>> </wsa:Address>
>>>         </wse:NotifyTo>
>>>       </wse:Delivery>
>>>     </wse:Subscribe>
>>>   </s:Body>
>>> </s:Envelope>
>>> - gp
>>>
>>> Yves Lafon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Gilbert Pilz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> WS-Addressing 1.0 - Core defines two "special" URIs;
>>>>> "http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous" and
>>>>> "http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/none". Messages targeted  
>>>>> to either
>>>>> of these URIs are processed differently from messages targeted to
>>>>> "normal" URIs such as "http://webserivce.bea.com/. . .".
>>>>
>>>> Well, they are different, but unless you know WS-Addressing, or  
>>>> unless you resolve http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous  
>>>> and find out the relationship between this URI and the WS- 
>>>> Addressing spec.
>>>> If you resolve http://webservice.bea.com/... you will probably  
>>>> have information about the endpoint, or you may know it in  
>>>> advance from another document. So both URIs are opaque, unless  
>>>> you know their semantic.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Take care:
>>
>>     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
>>     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited
>>     Hayes Park Central
>>     Hayes End Road
>>     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE
>>     Reg. No. 4153469
>>
>>     +44-7590-293439 (Mobile)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>>
>> Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited
>> Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE
>> Registered No. 4153469
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole use of  
>> addressee(s) and
>> may contain information which is privileged and confidential.  
>> Unauthorised
>> use or copying for disclosure is strictly prohibited. The fact that  
>> this
>> e-mail has been scanned by Trendmicro Interscan and McAfee  
>> Groupshield does
>> not guarantee that it has not been intercepted or amended nor that  
>> it is
>> virus-free.
>

Take care:

     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited
     Hayes Park Central
     Hayes End Road
     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE
     Reg. No. 4153469

     +44-7590-293439 (Mobile)








______________________________________________________________________
                                        
 Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited
 Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE
 Registered No. 4153469
 
 This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole use of addressee(s) and
 may contain information which is privileged and confidential. Unauthorised
 use or copying for disclosure is strictly prohibited. The fact that this
 e-mail has been scanned by Trendmicro Interscan and McAfee Groupshield does
 not guarantee that it has not been intercepted or amended nor that it is
 virus-free. 
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2009 15:50:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:17:54 GMT