- From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:01:58 -0800
- To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
All, During last week's call (during the discussion of issue i019) I took an action to explore the implication of wsdl version to the value of the [action] property along with other components in EPR. Issue i019 and i034 talk about WSDL version neutrality and focuses on the value of the [action] property when a service is described by multiple WSDL documents using different WSDL versions. But an EPR has components that are tied to specific WSDL artifacts. Specifically: [selected port type] [service-port] As a resolution to issue i019 we have agreed to abstract it out (wrt to WSDL version) and define the mappings in the WSDL mapping specification. If an EPR contains either the [selected port type] or [service-port] both of which have a QName (either QName of portType/interface or QName of wsdl11/12 service) which identify the version of the WSDL that the EPR is associated with. If any of the above two properties exist in an EPR, then it is clear which WSDL version is in use and the issue of version neutrality (wrt the value of the [action] property) does not arise. But since the above two properties are optional, there are indeed cases where it will be unclear as to which WSDL is being used and therefore may be unclear as to what the value of the [action] property should be. I would prefer that [selected port type] and [service-port] be required (issue i023), but pending the resolution of that issue, I would like to suggest that it is upto the consumer of the EPR to figure out which WSDL version is in play and use the appropriate WSDL binding rules. For the case where the service has several versions of WSDL (describing the same service), it doesn't really matter which version the consumer picks. Comments? -Anish --
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 19:02:35 UTC