W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > December 2004

New text for SOAP Modules/Features

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:35:53 -0500
Message-ID: <80A43FC052CE3949A327527DCD5D6B27AC8BFD@MAIL01.bedford.progress.com>
To: "WS Description List" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Cc: "Asir Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>


Hey folks:

I was writing up some text which we might consider putting in the spec
to account for issues LC29b [1] and LC18 [2] (I still don't think this
is really necessary but wanted to see what it might look like anyway),
and I noted the first sentence from section 2.6.1 of Part 3 seems a
little confusing:

<text>
In SOAP, it is permissible for specification interaction to engage one
or more additional features (typically implemented as one or more SOAP
header blocks), as defined by SOAP Modules (see [SOAP 1.2 Part 1:
Messaging Framework]). 
</text>

I'd suggest replacing it with:

<text>
In SOAP, additional semantics such as security, reliability, etc. may be
engaged via SOAP headers.  The combined rules and syntax for such
extensions are known as SOAP Modules (see [SOAP 1.2 Part 1: Messaging
Framework]).
</text>

and then here's some text we might add immediately thereafter:

Note : although SOAP Modules may implement zero or more Features, there
is no syntactic relationship between the <soap:module> and
<wsdl:feature> elements.  This is because the final arbiter of which
features a given module implements is the module specification itself -
any system supporting the module will inherently therefore know which
features are supported by virtue of the module's activation.

Asir, others, what do you think?

--Glen

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC29b
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC18
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2004 16:35:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:33 GMT