- From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:25:36 -0700
- To: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- CC: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
The second reference should be: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-async-tf/2005Feb/0005.html -Anish -- Anish Karmarkar wrote: > > Speaking for myself, there are two things (related to async and use of > ws-addressing) that I would like to get clarification on from XMLP > (these things have come up before on the XMLP/WSDL/async-TF list). These > two things, I don't think is "new work" but clarification on the > existing SOAP-HTTP binding. > > 1) Does the SOAP/HTTP binding require that a SOAP envelope be sent back > in the HTTP-response (for the non-failure case). See [1]. > > 2) Can 303 status code be used for pull-based async req-response using > the existing SOAP/HTTP binding. See thread starting at [2]. > > Thx. > > -Anish > -- > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2004Nov/0005.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2004Nov/0005.html > > > Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> >> Mike: I'll ask on next week's telecon. >> >> Addressing WG: Please see below WRT WSDL's request to start a one-way >> MEP; we'll discuss whether we have anything to add next week (Reply- >> To set to the Addressing list to keep the cross-chatter down). >> >> Regards, >> >> >> On Jun 21, 2005, at 10:35 AM, <michael.mahan@nokia.com> >> <michael.mahan@nokia.com> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Glen, >>> >>> Mark, does WS-Addressing have any additional requirements or scoping >>> statements to this? >>> >>> Thx, >>> Mike >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: www-ws-cg-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-cg-request@w3.org]On >>> Behalf Of ext Glen Daniels >>> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 1:38 PM >>> To: www-ws-cg@w3.org >>> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org; public-ws-async-tf@w3.org >>> Subject: Requirements for one-way MEP >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Greetings, CG: >>> >>> As Jonathan mentioned in [1], the WS-Description group have requested >>> the specification of a one-way SOAP MEP. I believe the deliverables >>> here are as follows: >>> >>> * A SOAP one-way MEP, which describes a simple "fire and forget" >>> single-message pattern, with an appropriate URI and specification as >>> per >>> the SOAP 1.2 binding framework. >>> >>> * A binding of this MEP to HTTP. This may involve changing the >>> existing >>> HTTP binding, or may involve generating a new one. >>> >>> * A clear description of how each party (sender and receiver) >>> determines >>> which MEP is in use. >>> >>> The requirements for this are pretty much spelled out above, except for >>> one more (fairly light/intangible one) that I would add: >>> >>> * Should if possible take into account the WS-I work in this area. >>> >>> I thought there might be more to it, but I think that's about it! If >>> anyone from WSDL/async thinks there are more requirements, please chime >>> in. >>> >>> --Glen >>> >>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-cg/2005Jun/0000.html >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist >> Office of the CTO BEA Systems >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 23:25:51 UTC