W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2005

RE: Additional HTTP and safety primer example and text

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:36:15 +0100
Message-ID: <2B7789AAED12954AAD214AEAC13ACCEF2709E42A@i2km02-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <kevin.liu@sap.com>, <kevin.liu@sap.com>, <dorchard@bea.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
my understanding is safety can be used to provide a default verb which
may be overridden by the HTTP binding. i.e:
 
"""
2) The HTTP binding would take a dependency upon the safe attribute, and
when the safe property is set to true, the HTTP method would default to
GET, though this can be overridden when other considerations (e.g. data
not easily serialized in a URI) apply.  This satisfied those who felt
safety was important enough to not only remain in the family of
Recommendations, but to have a real effect on the HTTP binding.
"""
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jun/0009.html

 
I suggest changing Dave's wording of 'will set the method' to 'will by default
set the method' or some such
 
 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org on behalf of Liu, Kevin 
	Sent: Thu 6/16/2005 11:49 PM 
	To: Liu, Kevin; David Orchard; WS-Description WG 
	Cc: 
	Subject: RE: Additional HTTP and safety primer example and text
	
	
	David,
	 
	I have changed the primer to reflect the changes we agreed upon below, except one item,
	 

	"Addition to 6.7

	 

	wsdlx:safe="true"

	on the interface operation element.  The HTTP Binding will set the method to GET if wsdlx:safe="true"
	"

	 

	when tried to make this change, I realized that it contradicts with the status quo of section 6.7 which says: 

	 

	"Although the wsdlx:safe attribute of an interface operation indicates that the abstract operation is safe, it does not automatically cause GET to be used at the HTTP level when the binding is specified. The choice of GET or POST is determined at the binding level: "

	 

	 

	As I stated in my initial response, such change involves semantic changes to wsdlx:safe. It needs the approval of the group, and should be reflected in the core specs first before included in the primer.

	 

	Best Regards,
	Kevin
	  

	 
	
	

  _____  

		From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Liu, Kevin
		Sent: Thursday, Jun 16, 2005 12:13 PM
		To: David Orchard; WS-Description WG
		Subject: RE: Additional HTTP and safety primer example and text
		
		
		David, 
		 
		Thanks a lot to thinking this through.  Actually at this moment, I am just looking into how to reflect the changes of safety in the primer, your proposal saves me a lot of time:))
		 
		I will incorporate pretty much all your propsoals except a few point that need clarification. See my comments below.

		Best Regards,
		Kevin
		  

		 
		
		

  _____  

			From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard
			Sent: Wednesday, Jun 15, 2005 9:59 PM
			To: WS-Description WG
			Subject: Additional HTTP and safety primer example and text
			
			

			Section 2.4 and 5.1 example should change safe to wsdlx:safe
			[Kevin]  will do. we also need to change example 2.1

			 

			I suggest 5.4.1 needs some text to describe how wsdlx:safe can be used.  
			[Kevin] yes. 

			 

			there are already 3 paragraphs in 5.4.1 explaining safety attribute. I am thinking the only change needed is to reflect the fact that safe is not an optional attributes of interface/operation any more, but a global attribute that can be used with interface/peration. what do you think?

			 

			 My suggestion: The wsdlx:safe attribute may be used in bindings.  The HTTP binding uses a "true" setting of wsdlx:safe to indicate that HTTP GET is the operation, simplifying the HTTP Binding.
			[Kevin] is this adopted semantic for the wsdlx:safe attribute? If so, I have no problem adding it to the primer. But I don't want to introduce new semantic via the primer.

			 

			Example 6.2 needs type="http://www.w3.org/2005/05/wsdl/http" in the binding.
			[Kevin] yes, will add.  

			 

			Addition to 6.7

			 

			wsdlx:safe="true"

			on the interface operation element.  The HTTP Binding will set the method to GET if wsdlx:safe="true"
			[Kevin] yes, will do 

			 

			 

			I suggest a new section 6.8

			 

			6.8 Safety and the HTTP Binding

			In the GreatH interface definition shown in example 2.4, the wsdlx:safe attribute = "true".  The HTTP binding will use this value to set the http method to GET, meaning that methodDefault on binding or method on binding operation do not need to be set for HTTP GET.  The HTTP Binding can be simplified to:

			 

			<binding name="reservationHTTPBinding"

			      interface="tns:reservationInterface"

			      type="http://www.w3.org/2005/05/wsdl/http" >

			 

			    <operation ref="tns:opCheckAvailability"

			        whttp:location="{checkInDate}"/>

			  </binding>

			 

			The binding operation has used the wsdlx:safe attribute to generate the HTTP GET operation.
			[Kevin]  if this is adopted semantic for the wsdlx:safe attribute, i can certainly add this, but would probably add as a subsection of 6.7

			 

Received on Friday, 17 June 2005 09:36:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:36 GMT