W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > August 2006

NEW ISSUE: None URI should be a special case and allowed when wsaw:anonymous=required

From: David Illsley <david.illsley@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 22:41:55 +0100
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFA7AED8A8.178D246D-ON802571BF.00769139-802571BF.00770431@uk.ibm.com>

Another part of the table/rules is that the None URI should be a special 
case and allowed in a ReplyTo/FaultTo when wsaw:anonymous=required which 
is not currently part of the spec. This seemed intuitive to me (because 
the none uri is explicitly defined and doesn't conflict with the idea of 
not using a separate response channel) and seems to have been for others 
I've raised it with.


David Illsley
Web Services Development
MP127, IBM Hursley Park, SO21 2JN
+44 (0)1962 815049 (Int. 245049)

Arun Gupta <Arun.Gupta@Sun.COM> 
Sent by: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
08/03/2006 07:23 PM

Bob Freund <bob@freunds.com>
W3C WS-Addressing Public List <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Re: wsaw:Anonymous combinations

Yes, the grey cells in the table are undefined behavior and needs to be 


Bob Freund wrote:
> Arun,
> Are there discrete issues you would like to raise?
> Thanks
> -bob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Arun Gupta
> Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 5:47 PM
> To: W3C WS-Addressing Public List
> Subject: wsaw:Anonymous combinations
> I've attached the table listing the combinations, and endpoint behavior,
> using different ReplyTo/FaultTo and wsaw:Anonymous values.
> Thanks,
> -Arun

got Web Services ?
Download and Contribute Web Services Interoperability Technology (WSIT)
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2006 21:40:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:28:40 UTC