- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 12:32:16 -0400
- To: "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Here is a list of design questions .. General Approach ---------------- Q1. Re-use vs. New Vocabulary? * Proposal A: re-use [1] * Proposal B: new vocabulary [2] SOAP Module ----------- Q2. SOAP module is a concept. The term SOAP module does not exist in SOAP 11 technical draft. It is possible to backport it. Plus, in practice, web services security is a SOAP module that can be used with SOAP 11 or 12. Shall we allow SOAP modules in SOAP 11 binding? [3] URI --- Q3. URIs for SOAP 11 HTTP Binding and implicit message exchange pattern: SOAP 11 draft does not use URIs for the underlying protocol, message exchange patterns, etc. SOAP 11 binding provides URIs for these features, HTTP Binding * http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/soap11/bindings/HTTP * http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http * .. MEP * http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/soap11/mep/request-response * .. WS-I Basic Profile 1.0 ---------------------- Q4. What is the relationship between SOAP 11 binding and WS-I Basic Profile 1.0? * SOAP 11 Binding is WS-I Basic Profile compliant 1.0 * WS-I Basic Profile 1.0 as a SOAP Module? * SOAP 11 Binding subsumes WS-I Basic Profile 1.0 * .. Q5. WS-I Basic Profile 1.0 defines a new message exchange pattern: one-way (R2714, R2750, R2727) [4]. SOAP 11 binding provides a URI for this MEP, * http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/soap11/mep/one-way * .. Shall we allow it? [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0250.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0305.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0268.html [4] http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.0-2004-04-16.html#R2714 Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu asirv at webmethods dot com http://www.webmethods.com/
Received on Monday, 2 August 2004 12:37:07 UTC