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

LC315 complement

From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:22:50 +0200
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org, Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <20051027142250.GH21550@w3.org>
I have implemented LC315's resolution in Part 2 (modulo Jacek's
approval on [1]).

I realized that, when we changed the HTTP Header component, we hadn't
changed the IRI identification.

Here is what I did:

  6.6.6 IRI Identification Of A HTTP Header component

  WSDL Version 2.0 Part 1: Core Language [WSDL 2.0 Core Language]
  defines a fragment identifier syntax for identifying components of a
  WSDL 2.0 document.

  An HTTP Header component can be identified using the wsdl.extension
  XPointer Framework scheme:


   1. parent is the pointer part of the {parent} component, as
      specified in WSDL Version 2.0 Part 1: Core Language.

   2. name is the {name} property value.

In order to do this, we need a unique {name} value per {parent}.

As we are already saying:

  If an HTTP header field corresponding to the value of {name}
  property is set by a mechanism other than the HTTP binding, such as
  the HTTP stack or another feature, then an error MUST be raised.

I added the following:

  It is an ERROR for a Binding Message Reference or a Binding Fault
  component's {http headers} property to contain multiple HTTP Header
  components with the same {name} property.

Note that RFC2616 says:

   Multiple message-header fields with the same field-name MAY be
   present in a message if and only if the entire field-value for that
   header field is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e., #(values)].

I don't see this as a problem.

Jonathan, can we check the WG is happy with this?



  1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Oct/0053.html
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/

Received on Thursday, 27 October 2005 14:22:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:57 UTC