W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > October 2005

RE: Issue i065 : Conflict between default action pattern and SOAPAction

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:05:50 +0100
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC952255E187A3@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <katy_warr@uk.ibm.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

I was unclear the impact of adopting either proposal would
have on our CR status - would we have to go back to Last Call?

Also having recently talked with people tasked with securing 
Web services who worry about SOAPAction != wsa:Action
!= the 'action' being authorised, I'm inclined to keep the 
Status Quo.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of Katy Warr
Sent: Mon 10/17/2005 10:17 PM
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: Issue i065 : Conflict between default action pattern and SOAPAction
Here is a summary of what was said on the call re i065.  Apologies if I 
missed of any points, but I'm sure someone can put me straight :o)

wsa:Action MUST equal SOAPAction but this is not possible in all cases 
(i.e. when wsa:Action is being gen'd by default Action pattern).

In the absence of <wsaw:Action>, use SOAPAction in preference to 
defaultAction pattern.
+ Keeps SOAPAction and wsa:Action the same which might be considered 
better architecturally
- Are implementations using the relative URIs for SOAPAction? (To 
- Makes the specification for generating wsa:Action more complicated

In absence of <wsaw:Action>, use default Action Pattern (as stated 
currently).    Relax the restriction that Action MUST equal SOAPAction 
(but recommend that they SHOULD equal)
+ Simpler pattern for wsa:Action generation
- Makes implementation more complex if the Action and SOAPAction differ 
(for example, which to dispatch on)
Received on Monday, 17 October 2005 22:05:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:28:29 UTC