- From: Katy Warr <katy_warr@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:34:29 +0000
- To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF7415C911.FB1CFCEC-ON802570DE.003DE0B9-802570DE.003F95B6@uk.ibm.com>
The WS-A WSDL spec appears to be too restrictive wrt [destination] MAP.
Here is the text:
>> 4.1 Destination
>>
>> The value of the [destination] message addressing property for a
message sent to an endpoint MUST match the
>> value of the {address} property of the endpoint component (WSDL 2.0) or
the address value provided by the relevant
>> port extension (WSDL 1.1). For a SOAP 1.1 port described using WSDL
1.1, the value is provided by the location
>> attribute of the soap11:address extension element.
However, there are scenarios where the WSDL address is overridden at
runtime
by the programming model (for example: JAX-RPC targetEndpointAddress).
The mandating of the [destination] MAP to the WSDL address in the above
text does not allow for override.
It forces the [destination] to be the development-time WSDL address rather
than an updated runtime address.
Looking back at the issue that generated this text, I wondered whether the
intent was that the [destination] should be
derived from the WSDL address only in the absence of additional
information (as proposal 1 of the issue below)?
This text was a result of issue 56:
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i056
It was resolved with option 1 from the f2f minutes:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Oct/0001
The text for option 1 is:
>> The [destination] property is taken from the endpoint or port address -
>> derived address (WSDL 2.0) or the applicable WSDL 1.1 extension (for
>> SOAP it is taken from soap:address/@location). ...
Before opening this as an issue, what are other folk's opinions?
Thanks
Katy
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2005 11:35:44 UTC