- From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:58:04 -0500
- To: "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
- Cc: WS-Addressing <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
- Message-id: <437B813C.2080406@tibco.com>
I prefer (2). I believe the name of the attribute was to be (or contain) "Anonymous", in which case <wsa:UsingAddressing Anonymous="Allowed"/> seems better than <wsa:UsingAddressing Anonymous="AnonAllowed"/> Again, I /don't/ like the use of "async" anywhere in this, as the term is too heavily overloaded. Yalcinalp, Umit wrote: > Folks, > > I took an [action item] to send Proposal 1 so that it can be > reevaluated and modified. I am wondering whether we could make high > level decisions on the syntax first because this is where we will end > up anyway. If we make a decision first on this, it is easier to write > this section as it is a straightforward exercise. > > We have three options to represent asyncronous capabilities of the > endpoint, binding or binding/operation to describe the granularity of > supporting anonymous and non-anonymous URI as response addresses. > > We have three granularity levels to support (full capabilities of > addressing, supporting only anonymous URIs as response addresses or > supporting only non-anon) > > > (1) Two elements (as [Proposal1]) > usingAddressing element as currently described > Async element which is used in conjunction with usingAddressing > element with three values. > > (2) Marc's proposal (usingAddressing element with an attribute with > three values) [Marc]. > He proposes "Required", "Allowed", "Disallowed". I propose > "AnonRequired", "AnonDisallowed", "AnonAllowed" to reflect the > semantics we want to capture. > > (3) (new option) This came up during our conversations in writing > Proposal 1 and I speculate it may be discussed again. > > Use three elements: > > usingAddressing: It corresponds to the full usage of addressing > semantics including both anon/non-anon URI > usingAddressingAnonURIRequired (obvious) > usingAddressingNonAnonURIRequired (obvious) > > In option 1 and 2, we need to replace the text: > > {The inclusion of the wsaw:UsingAddressing element indicates that the > applicable WS-Addressing specifications are supported within the > constraints of the WSDL binding being used. That is, uses of the > WS-Addressing specifications that may violate or are inconsistent with > the semantics of the endpoint's WSDL binding are not supported unless > explicitly stated by some other mechanism. > > Specifically, when included in a SOAP binding, the > wsaw:UsingAddressing marker identifies the use of Web Services > Addressing 1.0 bound to SOAP as defined by Web Services Addressing 1.0 > - SOAP Binding[/_WS-Addressing-SOAP_/]. > > The presence of the wsaw:UsingAddressing element in the binding or > endpoint (port) components of the endpoint description does not change > the semantics of the binding. E.g. in the case of the WSDL SOAP/HTTP > synchronous binding for request-response operations, the presence of > the wsaw:UsingAddressing element does not change the requirement that > the response message be sent over the same HTTP channel over which the > request was received. In this case, the wsa:replyTo header in the > request MUST NOT contain an address with a value different from the > anonymous URI.} > > The last option requires changes section 3.1 somewhat as we need to > introduce all the new elements. > > > Let me know if you still want to see the full writeup for Option 1. I > will be very happy to write the target text depending on which syntax > that we choose to adopt as well. > > All syntax formulations must reflect the decision we have taken as a > wg, namely > > == there are three levels of granularity > == the new {Async element/attribute|?} is general, not targeted to > SOAP1.1/HTTP and talks about anon/non-anon URIs in their definition. > > == scoping is extended to binding operation > == separate section targets SOAP 1.1/HTTP binding semantics (semantics > of separate connection, 202, etc). > > > --umit > > > [Proposal1] > _http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Oct/0116.html_ > > [Marc] > _http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Nov/0039.html_ > > [Action Item] _http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/5/11/f2f-minutes.html_ > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2005 18:58:15 UTC