public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org from May 2005 by subject

[Editorial][Core] Example 3-1 lc40

[Editorial][Core] Section 4

[Editorial][Core] Table 3-1

[Editorial][SOAP] IRI for SOAP 1.2 Module and SOAP 1.1 Extension

[Editorial][SOAP] MessageId vs MessageID

[message id] should be optional

Another Security Consideration

Clarify which fault if SOAP Action and wsa:Action don't match (SOAP, substantive)

Comment from WSDL group on ReplyTo

Comments on WS-A Core

Comments on WS-A SOAP Binding

content of fault detail

dereferencing namespace URI - but no link (editorial)

Editorial nit - WS-Addressing Core

Editorial nit regd Example 1-1 in Core

Editorial: Wording clarifications in Core Section 4

Fwd: Last call issue with section 3.0: why does this spec man date a dispatching model?

Fwd: Last call issue with section 3.0: why does this spec mandate a dispatching model?

introduction of MAP and MEP terms

IRI escaping when constructing a reply

Last Call Comment (Core): WS-Addressing restricted to XML 1.0 or not?

Last Call Issues #46

LC 30 (Formal definition of wsa:isReferenceParameter) is resolved

LC Comment (Core and SOAP): Security model is insufficient

LC Comment: "... the processor MUST fault" in section 3.2 is vacuous.

LC Comment: (editorial) Definitions of MAPs in core section 3 should have their own subsection

LC Comment: (editorial) Processors unconstrained in the face of non-compliant messages.

LC Comment: (editorial) Security implications of [message id] in re-transmissions

LC Comment: MAPs in EPR reference params

LC Comment: Message compliance

LC Comment: Multiple reply relationships

LC Comment: Rewriting by intermediaries

LC Comment: Supported faults

LC Comment: Uniqueness of [message id]

LC Comment: When is a fault/reply expected?

LC Comment:(editorial) Use of mustUnderstand=1 in example

LC Editorial Comment for WS-Addressing Core Specification

lc13 closed

lc28 Mixed notation and indirect terminology for MAPs (Closed)

lc32: effect of wsa:IsReferenceParameter on validation

LC42,43,48,49,51 closed

LC45 and LC47 closed.

lc59 Missing xml namespace prefix declaration

Lc66: Presentation of typing information in element decsriptions

lc7 closed

LC:14 Clearer wording for Table 3-1

mandatory action

mandatory fault reason

mandatory ReplyTo, handling replies in WS-Addressing

no mustUnderstand extensibility

nonNegativeInteger or duration for RetryAfter

presentation of typing information in element descriptions

Question regarding cardinality of [destination]

SOAP Binding & Core: Interaction between Faults and [message id] and [reply endpoint] etc.

Uniqueness of [message id]

use of IRIs in WS-Addressing

What does core section 3 actually require?

WS Description WG comments on WS-A (editorial)

WS-Addr LC Issue 33 Closed

WS-Addr LC Issue 34 Closed

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core - ed nit - section 1.2 (references)

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 - what is a 'request' and what is a 'reply'?

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- How does one extend the abstract properties of an endpoint reference

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- immutability of MAPs

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- Notational conventions not explained

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- requirement of XML 1.0

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core -- XML infoset representation of EPR > Information model

WS-Addressing 1.0 Core, inconsistent use of 'Endpoint Reference' (ed nit)

WS-Addressing Core, section 1.1 editorial nit

WS-Addressing Last Call Issue 36 closed used your proposed resolution

WS-Addressing Last Call issue 64 closed

WS-Addressing LC Issue 57 Closed

WS-Addressing LC Issue 73 Closed

ws-addressing LC review editorial comments

Last message date: Tuesday, 24 May 2005 17:19:58 UTC