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

Re: Action Item 2004-07-01 Solution to 168/R114

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 01:40:24 +0600
Message-ID: <084601c46911$4657dba0$f24e4109@LANKABOOK>
To: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Hi Umit,

> I am afraid you are skewing the requirement a bit. 

Actually now I think its the other way around :-).

> The problem is 
> not really exposing how the dispatch is done, the 
> problem is exposing to the client enough information so that
> it knows how to construct messages AND headers so that dispatch
> can be done by the receiver.

+1 for telling the client all (s)he needs to know. I assume we
are ok on the body. We removed @headers and have now agreed to
add the AD header feature as a way to introduce "headers" 
abstractly. 

That is *plenty* to describe all the payload AND headers the
client must send. If that's all we are talking about then we are
indeed done!

> I have said this many times in this thread that there are 
> many ways a service can implement it, the question is what
> the client must know to enable the dispatch.

There's a subtle overstatement above from my POV: the client only
needs to adhere to the requirements indicated in the WSDL. *How*
those requirements enable dispatch in the server *is not* the
client's business. It simply doesn't care ...

> If your view of the world is that WSDL does not contain the
> contract and there is some other out of band mechanism to
> communicate this information, then we are arguing about a 
> different problem. 

That's not the point. If indeed some "extra" info (like WS-Addr's
<wsa:Action> header) is required for the server to correctly process
the message then of course the client must be informed that its 
gotta comply. I fully expect to put that hint into WSDL (which WS-Addr
already does for WSDL 1.1)!

I think the main point is that we must stop thinking about this from
a "dispatch problem" point of view. The issue is that the client must
be told everything it needs to know in order to get what it wants
done, done. Part of that info may be used for dispatch, part of it
to charge the client's credit card and the other part to offer him
some custom marketing stuff. I, the client, don't care what gets 
used for what. (I certainly may not want to use a service which
insists on receiving my bank account info, but that's a different
matter.)

It seems like we're nearly in violent agreement. 

Sanjiva.
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 15:41:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:32 GMT