W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2006

my action re: CR044

From: Charlton Barreto <charlton_b@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 16:00:35 +0100
Message-ID: <11899862.1150383635297.JavaMail.charlton_b@mac.com>
To: WS-Description WG <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

I accepted an action on last week's telecon to review the text appropriate to CR044 in Part 2 to ensure that it adequately explained the rationale for default properties in support of interface-less bindings. 

Per my review, the language presenting the use of default rules for each binding (section 5 for SOAP 1.2 and 6 for HTTP), the elaboration on binding rules for SOAP MEP Selection in section 5.10.3, and the elaboration on binding rules for HTTP Method Selection in section 6.3.1, in combination, clearly explain the use of default properties to support interface-less bindings. I would recommend some wordsmithing in section 6.3.1 for additional clarity and smoother reading (changes in «»):

"For a given Interface Operation component, if there is a Binding Operation component whose {interface operation} property matches the component in question and its {http method} property has a value, then «the HTTP request method is» the value of the {http method} property."
"Otherwise, «the HTTP request method is» the value of the Binding component's {http method default}, if any."

Yet, the wording regarding the elaboration on the use of {http transfer coding} and {http query parameter separator} could use some additional clarification in my opinion - although one can logically follow the progression from the previous elaboration on HTTP binding rules, it may not be obvious enough. I will provide some proposed text for this soon.

-Charlton.
--
charlton_b@mac.com
+1.650.222.6507 m
+1.415.692.5396 v
Received on Thursday, 15 June 2006 15:01:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:40 GMT