- From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:41:22 -0400
- To: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Cc: paul.downey@bt.com, Francisco Paco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>, Umit Yalcinalp <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>, Arun Gupta <arun.gupta@Sun.COM>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org
- Message-id: <2BC04F10-1BF8-4B84-A95D-33319AE4577E@Sun.COM>
On Aug 9, 2005, at 5:41 PM, Anish Karmarkar wrote: >>> >>>> Here are the options as I see them: >>>> 1. Inclusion of wsa:Action is equivalent to inclusion of >>>> wsa:UsingAddressing with wsdl:required=true (messages MUST >>>> include wsa MAPs and wsa:Action MUST be honored) >>>> 2. Inclusion of wsa:Action is equivalent to inclusion of >>>> wsa:UsingAddressing with wsdl:required=false (messages MAY >>>> include wsa MAPs but if so wsa:Action MUST be honored) >>>> 3. Inclusion of wsa:Action without inclusion of >>>> wsa:UsingAddressing is purely advisory (messages MAY include >>>> wsa MAPs and if so wsa:Action MAY be honored) >>>> 4. Something else. >>>> I don't like 1 since it seems to circumvent wsdl:required and >>>> will require special wsa aware WSDL processors. 2 and 3 seem >>>> OK, I have a preference for 2. >>>> >>> >>> I tend to favor #3 (except for the last 'MAY'), but would like >>> to phrase it differently: >>> When WS-Addressing is engaged for a particular service/operation/ >>> message (irrespective of the value of wsaw:UsingAddressing) and >>> wsaw:Action is present, all the rules around wsaw:Action MUST be >>> followed. >>> Inclusion of wsaw:Action does not affect the interpretation of >>> wsaw:UsingAddressing. This implies that if wsaw:Action is >>> present in WSDL and the corresponding message on the wire has >>> wsa:Action but this wsa:Action does not adhere to the semantics >>> of wsaw:Action then this is a violation of the spec. >>> >>> >> That sounds just like my #2 above - what am I missing ? >> > > #2 says that the presence of wsaw:Action is equivalent to the > presence of <wsaw:UsingAddressing wsdl:required='false'/> (when > such a marker is absent). This means that the service does support > WS-Addressing, but WS-Addressing is not required. > > Whereas what I'm stating above (as a reinterpretation of #3) is > that the presence of wsaw:Action does not necessarily mean that the > service supports WS-Addressing. > I'm still a bit confused, why would the WSDL have a wsa:Action in it if the service doesn't support WS-Addr ? Marc. --- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 12:41:29 UTC