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

Re: Action item 2003-11-03 OperationName feature

From: Umit Yalcinalp <umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:33:25 -0800
Message-ID: <40101775.4090806@oracle.com>
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: WS Description List <www-ws-desc@w3.org>


Mark Baker wrote:

>Hi Umit,
>
>This looks like a very good start.  I also want to study how this
>interacts with the HTTP binding, but that'll have to wait.
>
>On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 01:03:17PM -0800, Umit Yalcinalp wrote:
>  
>
>>The value of the SOAP Action property,
>>http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/features/action/Action, is a URI that
>>is constructed by using the value of the component designator that
>>uniquely identifies the operation utilizing the fragment identifier
>>that refers to the specific operation[2].
>>    
>>
>
>That assumes that SOAPAction's value is an operation name, but that
>isn't necessarily the case.  It is for declaring "intent", which may
>also be a *type* in some cases.
>
Ah, I guess my intent was not clear.

The only constraint on the SOAPAction value is only when you are using 
the OperationName feature AND choose to engage both the OperationName 
feature and the SOAP Action feature together.

This feature's intent is not to require  SOAP Action values and what 
they should be.  This feature's  goal is to enable by the use of a 
property to convey the receiver the name of the operation  and it 
describes a variety of ways to implement this using different bindings. 
This is why I described  a SOAP module to do this in a completely 
transport independent way. SOAP specification does not state what the 
value should be, our intent was to illustrate the only way you get the 
value to be constrained this way is when you use the OperationName 
feature, because the intent is to convey the name of the operation, 
nothing else.

Other possible values for the SOAP Action is not part of this feature, 
another feature may define what they could be in some other context.

>
>What are your thoughts regarding how this can be used when the
>operation is inherited from the application protocol?  Would you
>recommend a specific URI for operationName that indicates this?
>
>As it relates to my "ambiguous interface semantics" issue[1], I think
>that your specification provides a sound answer for the case when
>the feature is used; that a successful response to a request message
>using this feature means that the operation requested with the feature
>was performed.  I guess that the general case still needs addressing
>though; what if the operation is in SOAPAction, wsa:action, the
>application protocol, some other header, the body (without style=rpc),
>or outside the message entirely? (ouch, did I get all of them? 8-)
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2003Nov/0084.html
>
>Mark.
>  
>

-- 
Umit Yalcinalp                                  
Consulting Member of Technical Staff
ORACLE
Phone: +1 650 607 6154                          
Email: umit.yalcinalp@oracle.com
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2004 13:33:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:28 GMT