- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:25:29 -0500
- To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFE934C70A.119B70B9-ON85256FBD.006FC8FB-85256FBD.00703329@us.ibm.com>
Jonathan, Can we change "unconstrained by this specification" to something that indicates its the equivalent of using the anonymous URI? I believe that clients will expect the response to not only come back on the http response flow (or whatever is defined by the binding) but that it will also include the appropriate WSA headers. Leaving it as "unconstrained" means they may or may not appear on the response and I think it would be better to be explicit (and to include them). -Dug "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com> Sent by: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org 03/07/2005 01:46 PM To <public-ws-addressing@w3.org> cc Subject i050: Misalignment of treatment of reply messages and fault messages Per my AI to propose concrete text for option 3 (and I recall that was as modified by the FaultTo -> ReplyTo amendment even though the minutes aren't very clear), I propose we: - explain that ReplyTo and FaultTo are different, and therefore don't act precisely the same way, - add an explicit rule that faults are sent to FaultTo, when present, otherwise ReplyTo, when present. Concrete text follows: Add the following note, perhaps after the description of [fault endpoint]: "Note that faults and replies are different in terms of client expectation - replies are anticipated by a client while faults under normal circumstances are not. This difference is manifest in the [reply endpoint] property being mandatory when the client expects a reply, while the wsa:FaultTo is optional." [FWIW, I don't think this text is really necessary, I'd be happy to simply drop it.] Section 3.2 bullet 1b: "Otherwise, if the reply is a fault message and the incoming message's [fault endpoint] message addressing property is not empty, select the EPR from this property. If the [fault endpoint] property is empty, the behavior of the recipient of the incoming message is unconstrained by this specification." --> "Otherwise, if the reply is a fault message and the incoming message's [fault endpoint] message addressing property is not empty, select the EPR from this property. If the [fault endpoint] property is empty, select the EPR from the [reply endpoint] message addressing property, if it is not empty. If the [reply endpoint] message addressing property is empty, the behavior of the recipient of the incoming message is unconstrained by this specification."
Received on Monday, 7 March 2005 20:26:03 UTC