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

RE: Some MTOM precisions

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 07:50:15 -0700
To: "'Youenn Fablet'" <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Cc: "'Jean-Jacques Moreau'" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Message-ID: <017001c6f1fb$90272e50$3901a8c0@DELLICIOUS>

> The same extension element could be used for both MTOM and SWA, the
> switch being based on the soap version in use.

I don't think that would sufficiently disambiguate the cases, given the
existence of http://www.w3.org/Submission/2006/SUBM-soap11mtom10-20060405/.

Are you proposing that we expand our scope to include SwA
(http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP-attachments)?

Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Youenn Fablet
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 1:13 AM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Cc: Jean-Jacques Moreau
> Subject: Some MTOM precisions
> 
> 
> Following on last telcon's discussions, here are some potential
> enhancements to the proposal, related to engagement requiredness and
> optionality.
> These precisions may be suited for a primer or something like that.
> For input messages and input faults
>         - required means that MTOM must be supported and should be
> engaged by the client.
>                 Typically, when there is no binary data in a message,
> MTOM is not needed.
>         - optional means that MTOM may be engaged by the client and is
> supported by the service
> For output messages and output faults
>         - required means that MTOM must be supported by the client
>                 Engagement is based on the message content-type as per
> the MTOM specification.
>         - optional means that MTOM is supported and may be engaged by
> the service.
>                 Engagement must only be done when the service knows that
> the client supports MTOM.
>                 This knowledge may come from different sources: MTOM use
> in the input message, policy exchanges, content negociation (HTTP Accept
> header for instance)...
>                 By default, MTOM is not engaged.
> 
> There were also some discussions whether to use @wsdl:required to mark
> optionality/requiredness of the extension.
> While I do not recall the exact reasons for not reusing it, I would note
> that the WS-Addr UsingAddressing extension use @wsdl:required with the
> exact same intention.
> 
> Finally, I know that SWA can be described by WSDL1.1, but I do not think
> it can be described by WSDL2.0.
> The same extension element could be used for both MTOM and SWA, the
> switch being based on the soap version in use.
> In such a case, we should define a specific uri for the extension
> element and not directly reuse the MTOM URI.
> 
> I hope this helps.
> Regards,
>     Youenn
Received on Tuesday, 17 October 2006 14:50:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:42 GMT