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

RE: new proposal for 7911

From: Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:18:55 +0000
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
CC: "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Message-ID: <503546C5699C1144BDEA0D0DFFE7F88118179210@TK5EX14MBXC110.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Hi Doug,


  The Basic Profile defines an operation signature as a comination of the
[Action]
property and the QName of the [Body] child.  An implementation that examines
just one of those values, but at multiple points during the entire processing
of the message, are advised to ensure that the values that are used each time
are consistent.

Some implementations examine just the wsa:Action, some use the body wrapper, some use a combination of both (like Basic Profile does), and some others use various other techniques. Given the wide variance in how the messages are processed, there is no need to go into specific mechanisms used by implementations, since it is implementation detail.

On the other hand, as long as a message conforms to the XML outline of an operation as defined by the specification, it should be possible for any implementation to further process the message. Hence, I suggest that we clarify [1] the receiver behavior in the case when a message does not conform to the XML outline of the operation it is targeted at. That should, in my opinion, address the concern surrounding the receiver behavior.

Do you think [1] would work?

Thanks.

[1]

A receiving SOAP Node is encouraged to generate a SOAP 1.1 Client or SOAP 1.2 Sender fault, if a SOAP message targeted at an operation defined by this specification does not conform to the XML outline and description of the operation.

From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doug Davis
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:02 PM
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: new proposal for 7911


forwarding...

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com<mailto:dug@us.ibm.com>
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.
----- Forwarded by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM on 11/17/2009 03:02 PM -----
bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org<mailto:bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org<mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org>

11/17/2009 03:00 PM

To

public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org<mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org>

cc

Subject

[Bug 7911] mismatching action and body wrapper







http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7911





--- Comment #8 from Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com<mailto:dug@us.ibm.com>>  2009-11-17 20:00:51 ---
A new version of the text - making it a bit more generic:

The Basic Profile defines an operation signature as a comination of the
[Action]
property and the QName of the [Body] child.  An implementation that examines
just one of those values, but at multiple points during the entire processing
of the message, are advised to ensure that the values that are used each time
are consistent.


--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 20 November 2009 23:19:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:18:15 GMT