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

RE: Cross-binding HTTP Features

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 11:31:41 -0700
Message-ID: <5B10E50E14A4594EB1B5566B69AD94072EF572@maileast>
To: 'David Orchard' <dorchard@bea.com>, Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org

> If we wanted to make an "Generic HTTP features" section

I have a preference for this option. It is cleaner as you stated. I'll let
you make the call tho'.

Asir

-----Original Message-----
From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 12:54 PM
To: Asir Vedamuthu; www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: RE: Cross-binding HTTP Features


That's one way of doing it.  BTW, I wouldn't use the term "http transport
protocol" as the HTTP binding specifically does not use HTTP as a transport.


I had done another way, which was to list the http binding properties that
are also available for the soap binding.

The text that I inserted into section 2 is:
A subset of the the HTTP components specified in the HTTP Binding may be
expressed in a SOAP binding when the SOAP binding uses HTTP as the
underlying protocol. The components that are allowed are the ones that
contain properties that describe the underlying protocol. The components and
allowed properties are: http:binding with version, cookies,
defaultTransferCoding; http:operation with defaultTransferCoding; http:input
with transferCoding; http:output with transferCoding; and http:service with
authenticationType and authenticationRealm.

When the SOAP Message Exchange Pattern is the SOAP Response MEP, the binding
operation may contain an http:operation with a location attribute that
follows the http:operation location attributes construction rules. When such
a location is specified, the wsdl:endpoint also follows the rules for
constructing the address from the wsdl:address and http:operation location
values.

If we wanted to make an "Generic HTTP features" section that was then
referenced by HTTP Binding and SOAP binding, I guess I'm ok with it.  I
don't think it's too much editorial work to move the text around.  One part
that does get a bit ugly is for the soap response MEP, where the soap
binding would then have to carefully say under which conditions the location
attribute is used.  It might clean things up because then we wouldn't need
an "http:location" on operation, it would just be a wsdl:location.

Cheers,
Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Asir Vedamuthu
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 9:36 AM
> To: 'www-ws-desc@w3.org'
> Subject: Cross-binding HTTP Features
> 
> 
> 
> 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?
> 
> Regards,
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> asirv at webmethods dot com
> http://www.webmethods.com/ 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 14:52:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:31 GMT