- 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