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

Re: PROPOSAL: Drop interface/operation/(input|output)/@headers

From: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 12:07:14 -0400
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20031025120257.032c44a8@localhost>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, "Umit Yalcinalp" <umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

I don't think it's appropriate to leave the description of headers to "the 
domain of policies" until there is a formal effort to define a policy 
language. If we drop header descriptions from the core language, then at 
the least I think we need to define a feature that provides a mechanism to 
describe them. At least until such time as there is a formal policy language.

Anne

At 01:36 PM 10/23/2003, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
><snip>
>In our internal discussions, we've concluded that even when
>applications do introduce headers, that is done as a result of
>some policy being applied. Thus, just having a mechanism to
>declare a header isn't enough - one has to say what the
>lifecycle of that header is, what scope it has (not share
>across operations, shared across some ops, shared across all
>ops etc.).
>
>In other words, the mechanism in the current draft is woefully
>inadequate to describe headers. Extending the functionality is
>an option, but I don't think that's a path the WG will like to
>go on because it'll dramatically complicate WSDL for everyone.
>[Tom, where are you? ;-)]
>
>Hence our proposal that headers be dropped and left in the
>domain of policies to introduce and describe the semantics /
>lifecycle of.
>
>My apologies for the delay in replying.
>
>Sanjiva.
Received on Saturday, 25 October 2003 12:07:24 GMT

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