W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > December 2003

RE: Marking WSDL operations as "safe", in scope requirement?

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:18:43 -0800
To: "'Jonathan Marsh'" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00b101c3b9d2$449bfc90$d902200a@beasys.com>
Oh, i'm sorry.  I'd like this raised as an issue and an ideal resolution
would be to add this as a requirement.

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 11:13 AM
> To: Jean-Jacques Moreau; David Orchard
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Marking WSDL operations as "safe", in scope requirement?
> 
> 
> Pinging David Orchard again, we're unsure whether to treat 
> this as a new
> issue.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
> On
> > Behalf Of Jean-Jacques Moreau
> > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 6:58 AM
> > To: David Orchard
> > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Marking WSDL operations as "safe", in scope 
> requirement?
> > 
> > 
> > David,
> > 
> > This issue was briefly discussed before [3], but did not (yet?) make
> it
> > into the issues list.
> > 
> > Are you raising this as a new issue?
> > 
> > Jean-Jacques.
> > 
> > [3]
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2002Jun/0013.html>
> > 
> > David Orchard wrote:
> > 
> > > I haven't been able to tell from the drafts, and my apologies for
> that,
> > > whether WSDL 2.0 supports marking operations as "safe" or not.  I
> think
> > this
> > > hasn't been addressed yet in the bindings work, but I could be
> wrong.
> > I
> > > don't quite see this as a standalone requirement in [1] 
> though R125
> > comes
> > > close.  Is there intention to support this as part of the bindings
> work?
> > >
> > > As background, I ask this as this was a suggestion of the 
> TAG in the
> TAG
> > > issue 7 finding [2].  The extracted text is "However, to represent
> > safety in
> > > a more straightforward manner, it should be a property of 
> operations
> > > themselves, not just a feature of bindings."
> > >
> > > FWIW, I have also heard some customers want this functionality as
> they
> > don't
> > > have a standardized "ping" message so they want to use a safe
> request
> > and
> > > need a way of knowing.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Dave
> > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-desc-reqs/
> > > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/whenToUseGet.html
> > 
> 
> 


Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2003 14:18:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:27 GMT