- From: Nilo Mitra (TX/EUS) <nilo.mitra@ericsson.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 11:19:14 -0500
- To: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
I have the following comments on: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-soap-20050331 Comment 1 ========= [editorial] Section 2 says "....to transmit the properties listed above...". It should be "listed below", as the properties are listed in the section 2.3 that follows. Comment 2 ========= [editorial] Section 3.3 has text which includes "...message information header...". This should be "...message address header...". Comment 3 ========= Section 3.2, 2nd para has the sentence "The resulting header blocks are targetted at the ultimate recipient in the SOAP message path (note that extensions to WS-Addressing could be written to specify different targetting)." Apart from the fact that nothing in this sentence is normative, it is not clear if constructs such as <wsa:To soap:role="http://..../next" soap:relay="true">, which is also targeted at the ultimate receiver, are allowed by the present specification, without the need to create an extension to it. Comment 4 ========= Section 3.2, last para, last sentence states: "Note that the message addressing properties gathered by an intermediary when receiving a SOAP message do not necessarily get replayed as MAPs when resending the message along the message path." What does "replay" mean? Should it be "replaced"? In any case, the meaning of this sentence is unclear, and should be further explained. Comment 5 ========= [editorial] The explanatory text says "No endpoint can be found capable of acting in the role of the [destination] property." This is the fist use of the ambiguous word "role", and also differs from the [reason] code. The proposal is to rewrite the sentence as follows: "No endpoint can be reached for the address in the [destination] property." ==== Thanks, Nilo Nilo Mitra Ericsson, Inc. desk: +1 212-843-8451 mobile: +1 516-476-7427
Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2005 16:19:22 UTC