Tuesday, 24 May 2005
Monday, 23 May 2005
Friday, 20 May 2005
- Re: [Editorial][SOAP] IRI for SOAP 1.2 Module and SOAP 1.1 Extension
- WS-Addressing LC Issue 57 Closed
- WS-Addressing LC Issue 73 Closed
Wednesday, 18 May 2005
Tuesday, 17 May 2005
- Lc66: Presentation of typing information in element decsriptions
- Re: Question regarding cardinality of [destination]
- Re: Question regarding cardinality of [destination]
Monday, 16 May 2005
Friday, 13 May 2005
Thursday, 12 May 2005
- LC Editorial Comment for WS-Addressing Core Specification
- IRI escaping when constructing a reply
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- XML infoset representation of EPR > Information model
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - what is a 'request' and what is a 'reply'?
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- immutability of MAPs
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- How does one extend the abstract properties of an endpoint reference
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - section 2.1 -- unclear wording regarding conflicts between metadata (editorial)
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - section 2.1 -- what does 'each of the EPRs' refer to
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- Notational conventions not explained
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core, inconsistent use of 'Endpoint Reference' (ed nit)
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- requirement of XML 1.0
- WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - ed nit - section 1.2 (references)
- WS-Addressing Core, section 1.1 editorial nit
- Editorial nit regd Example 1-1 in Core
- Editorial nit - WS-Addressing Core
Wednesday, 11 May 2005
- lc13 closed
- lc7 closed
- Re: [Editorial][Core] Section 4
- Re: [Editorial][Core] Section 4
- Re: dereferencing namespace URI - but no link (editorial)
- Comments on WS-A SOAP Binding
- LC Comment: (editorial) Security implications of [message id] in re-transmissions
- Comments on WS-A Core
- Uniqueness of [message id]
- LC Comment (Core and SOAP): Security model is insufficient
Tuesday, 10 May 2005
Monday, 9 May 2005
- Re: introduction of MAP and MEP terms
- introduction of MAP and MEP terms
- Re: LC42,43,48,49,51 closed
- WS-Addressing Last Call issue 64 closed
- lc59 Missing xml namespace prefix declaration
- LC45 and LC47 closed.
- LC42,43,48,49,51 closed
- lc32: effect of wsa:IsReferenceParameter on validation
- RE: Editorial: Wording clarifications in Core Section 4
- RE: [Editorial][Core] Table 3-1
- RE: [Editorial][SOAP] MessageId vs MessageID
- RE: LC45 and LC47 closed.
- Re: [Editorial][Core] Example 3-1 lc40
- Re: LC45 and LC47 closed.
- Re: [Editorial][Core] Table 3-1
- Re: [Editorial][Core] Example 3-1 lc40
Thursday, 5 May 2005
- LC Comment: (editorial) Processors unconstrained in the face of non-compliant messages.
- LC Comment: Message compliance
- LC Comment: When is a fault/reply expected?
- LC Comment: "... the processor MUST fault" in section 3.2 is vacuous.
- LC Comment:(editorial) Use of mustUnderstand=1 in example
- LC Comment: (editorial) Definitions of MAPs in core section 3 should have their own subsection
- LC Comment: Rewriting by intermediaries
- LC Comment: Multiple reply relationships
- LC Comment: MAPs in EPR reference params
- LC Comment: Supported faults
- LC Comment: Uniqueness of [message id]
- lc28 Mixed notation and indirect terminology for MAPs (Closed)
Tuesday, 3 May 2005
- LC 30 (Formal definition of wsa:isReferenceParameter) is resolved
- Another Security Consideration
- Re: What does core section 3 actually require?
- LC:14 Clearer wording for Table 3-1
- What does core section 3 actually require?
- RE: Fwd: Last call issue with section 3.0: why does this spec mandate a dispatching model?
- nonNegativeInteger or duration for RetryAfter
- content of fault detail
- mandatory fault reason
- mandatory action
- mandatory ReplyTo, handling replies in WS-Addressing
- no mustUnderstand extensibility
- dereferencing namespace URI - but no link (editorial)
- presentation of typing information in element descriptions
- use of IRIs in WS-Addressing
- ws-addressing LC review editorial comments
Monday, 2 May 2005
- Re: Clarify which fault if SOAP Action and wsa:Action don't match (SOAP, substantive)
- WS-Addressing Last Call Issue 36 closed used your proposed resolution
- Re: SOAP Binding & Core: Interaction between Faults and [message id] and [reply endpoint] etc.
- Re: Last Call Comment (Core): WS-Addressing restricted to XML 1.0 or not?
- Re: Fwd: Last call issue with section 3.0: why does this spec man date a dispatching model?