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

[Issue 226] Re: Cross-binding HTTP Features

From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:37:34 +0200
To: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
Cc: "'www-ws-desc@w3.org'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20040721123734.GA21968@w3.org>
Hi Asir, all.

I had a look at issue 226[1] to resolve it editorially as agreed by
the WG.

* Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com> [2004-06-10 12:36-0400]
> Cross-binding HTTP Features are,
> 
> @http:authenticationType and @http:authenticationRealm at the endpoint EII.
> @http:cookies and @http:version at the binding EII.
> @http:transfer-coding at the input/output EII (with defaulting at binding
> and operation)
> ..
> 
> These features are available for use within SOAP 12 Binding, HTTP Binding,
> SOAP 11 Binding, etc. Should these HTTP features be designated as common
> HTTP transport protocol specific features and described in a separate
> section in Part 3?

I am wondering about flagging those particular properties as generic.
I could come up with a new SOAP HTTP binding and its description would
make use of say http:method, which could then be considered generic.

Basically, the set of so-called generic properties is difficult to
define, and I would go as far as saying that potentially any property
could be reused in another binding built upon the HTTP binding.

This is why I quite like Dave's approach of listing HTTP Binding
properties that apply to the SOAP 1.2 HTTP binding at the beginning.
In order to make it more reader-friendly, I think we should add some
links to where they're defined.

Does that make sense?

Regards,

Hugo

  1. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/ws/desc/issues/wsd-issues.html#x226
-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/

Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 08:37:34 GMT

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