W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2009

Re: WS-Resource-Access FPWG

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 11:25:20 -0400
To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
Cc: "'Bob Freund'" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF8863976.780FFD61-ON85257585.00526DBD-85257585.00546454@lotus.com>
Larry Masinter wrote:
> What about adding a note to the WS specs saying what the
> reservations are? So that even if they publish stuff the
> TAG origin might not like, we can limit the scope the damage?
>
> Larry

Ashok Malhotra wrote:

> We can do that but the problem is that such notes fade into the 
> noise and are ignored.

We do have the experience of having spent quite a lot of TAG time working 
with the Web Services addressing working group to add a note to Web 
Services Addressing Core that I believe is in the spirit of what Larry 
suggests.  Specifically, in Oct. 2005 the TAG expressed a concern that the 
WSA Addressing Core mechanisms permitted or perhaps even encouraged the 
use of XML elements as opposed to URIs for identification of Web Services 
endpoints.  After long discsussions, the working group agreed [2] to a 
compromise resolution, which was to include text that I think is very much 
in the spirit of the notes that Larry proposes.  The particular text is 
not important here, but it can be found in the email [2] and indeed in the 
final specification [3].

What is pertinent here is that the good practices signaled in the agreed 
note are indeed often ignored in practice.  Ironically, one of the 
particular concerns about WS-RA is that examples used in the WS-Transfer 
submission appear to ignore the note we worked so hard to agree on.  That 
is, a WS-Transfer GET is shown as follows [4]:

<s:Envelope 
    xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope" 
    xmlns:wsa="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/08/addressing" 
    xmlns:xxx="http://fabrikam123.example.com/resource-model" >
  <s:Header>
    <wsa:ReplyTo>
      <wsa:Address>
        soap://www.fabrikam123.example.org/pullport
      </wsa:Address>
    </wsa:ReplyTo>
    <wsa:To>soap://www.example.org/repository</wsa:To>
    <xxx:CustomerID>732199</xxx:CustomerID>
    <xxx:Region>EMEA</xxx:Region>
    <wsa:Action>
      http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/09/transfer/Get
    </wsa:Action>
    <wsa:MessageID>
      uuid:00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046
    </wsa:MessageID>
  </s:Header>
  <s:Body/>
</s:Envelope> 

I apologize in advance if my understanding of WS-Transfer and WSA is 
faulty, but I'm fairly sure that the above is the result of mapping into 
SOAP an EPR that addresses its endpoint not using only the URI 
soap://www.example.org/repository (and we can quibble about the use of the 
soap: URI scheme too, I suppose), but also the <xxx:CustomerID> and 
<xxx:Region> elements.  If the introductory examples for a core technology 
ignore the agreed direction, that's discouraging (to me).

So, there has indeed been a significant history of trying to deal with 
such issues by getting notes included in the pertinent specifications, and 
I think Ashok is right that the experience with such efforts has been at 
best mixed.  The question is whether we want to keep trying, and my 
impression is that a number of TAG members are saying:  no, this is 
reaching the point of diminishing returns.

Noh


[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-comments/2005Oct/0004
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2006Jan/0074.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-addr-core/#resourceidentification
[4] http://www.w3.org/Submission/WS-Transfer/#Get

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
03/26/2009 10:48 AM
Please respond to ashok.malhotra
 
        To:     Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
        cc:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, www-tag@w3.org, "'Bob Freund'" 
<bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
        Subject:        Re: WS-Resource-Access FPWG


We can do that but the problem is that such notes fade into the noise 
and are ignored.
But certainly worth considering.
All the best, Ashok


Larry Masinter wrote:
> What about adding a note to the WS specs saying what the
> reservations are? So that even if they publish stuff the
> TAG origin might not like, we can limit the scope the damage?
>
> Larry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf 
Of
> ashok malhotra
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:58 PM
> To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org; Bob Freund
> Subject: Re: WS-Resource-Access FPWG
>
> Personally, I think we should just let this go.  The TAG has bigger fish 

> to fry.
>
> If we do want to ask for something, we should ask WS-RA to define what 
> happens if you send
> an http GET to the URI in an EPR.  The answer should not be a 404 or a 
> SOAP message.
>
> All the best, Ashok
>
>
> noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> 
>> I chatted with Bob a bit at the AC meeting this week.   We all know 
that 
>> there have been some reservations on the part of individual TAG members 

>> about about aspects of either WS-RA itself, or the ways in which WS-RA 
>> uses technologies like WS-Addressing.  In particular, I've heard 
concerns 
>> expressed about the extent to which WS-RA re-implements HTTP at a 
>> different level and the stack, and also the possibility that WS-RA 
might 
>> encourage the use of WSA reference parameters for identification.  If 
the 
>> TAG does intend to raise such concerns against WS-RA formally, Bob 
>> requests that we do so earlier rather than later.
>>
>> So, I would appreciate it if other TAG members would let me know 
whether 
>> they wish to schedule discussion of such concerns.  I will collect 
>> responses and, based on them, decide about discussion scheduling.   If 
I 
>> get no such responses, I will (after doublechecking with the TAG) 
confirm 
>> to Bob that we do not currently expect to raise such issues against 
WS-RA.
>> 
>
> 
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Noah
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Noah Mendelsohn 
>> IBM Corporation
>> One Rogers Street
>> Cambridge, MA 02142
>> 1-617-693-4036
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Freund <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
>> Sent by: www-tag-request@w3.org
>> 03/23/2009 04:27 PM
>> 
>>         To:     www-tag@w3.org
>>         cc:     public-ws-resource-access-comments@w3.org, (bcc: Noah 
>> Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
>>         Subject:        WS-Resource-Access FPWG
>>
>>
>> Dear TAG
>> The WS-Resource-Access working group, on 2009-03-17 published the FPWD 
>> of five specifications and has begun public review:
>> WS-Transfer[1]
>> WS-Resource-Transfer[2]
>> WS-Eventing[3]
>> WS-Enumeration[4]
>> WS-Metadata-Exchange[5]
>>
>> Emails to all known groups in several organizations that may have an 
>> interest in these specifications will be sent in the near future.
>>
>> Prior to the start of the WS-Resource-Access working group, a TAG 
>> resolution[6] was published expressing concerns about several details 
>> of some of these specifications, especially WS-Transfer.   Since the 
>> WG is now under way, and on a tight nominal schedule, it would benefit 
>> all involved if issues that might arise from your review were to be 
>> created earlier rather than later.  It is my hope that all issues that 
>> might be raised against fundamental aspects of any of these 
>> specifications be created before Last Call if at all possible.
>> To that end, would the TAG please respond with specific issues of 
>> concern that in the opinion of the TAG need to be resolved in these 
>> specifications at its earliest convenience.
>> In any case, a response with issues, or a statement of no-issues would 
>> be appreciated.
>>
>> thanks
>> Bob Freund
>> Chair, WS-Resource-Access Working Group
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-transfer-20090317/
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-resource-transfer-20090317/
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-eventing-20090317/
>> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-enumeration-20090317/
>> [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-ws-metadata-exchange-20090317/
>> [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Nov/0008.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>
>
> 
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 15:24:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:13 GMT