- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:37:30 -0700
- To: "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
- Cc: "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com>, <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Thank you for your comment, which we tracked as LC102 [1]. The WG closed this issue by sending request to CG for one-way MEP and adding an ednote to the spec saying that if a one-way MEP becomes available, we'd like to default to it for in-only. If you find this resolution unacceptable please let us know within two weeks. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC102 > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Yalcinalp, Umit > Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 2:34 PM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Cc: Liu, Kevin > Subject: What is the SOAP MEP for In-only > > > Folks, > > It seems that we have a hole in our specification. > > We were trying to specify a WSDL interface that utilizes a single > input > message, i.e. with In-only MEP. > > Currently, per section 2.9.2 of Part3 [1] states the following: > > { > {soap mep}, a wsdls:anyURI, which is an absolute URI as defined by > [IETF > RFC 2396], to the Binding Operation component. The value of this > property identifies the SOAP Message Exchange Pattern (MEP) for this > specific operation. If no specific value is assigned, then the value > assigned by the default rules apply (for SOAP 1.2, see 2.10.3 Default > Binding Rules). It is an error for this property to not have a value > (which MAY happen if the default rules are not applicable). > } > > We then looked at (Section 2.10.3 Default Binding Rules) which says: > > { > SOAP MEP Selection. If the Interface Operation component's {message > exchange pattern} property has the value > "http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/wsdl/in-out" then the default value of the > {soap mep} property for the corresponding Binding Operation component > is > "http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/request-response/" identifying the > SOAP Request-Response Message Exchange Pattern as defined in [SOAP 1.2 > Part 2: Adjuncts]. If the Inteface Operation component has any other > value for the {message exchange pattern} property, then no default > value > is defined for the {soap mep} property of the corresponding Binding > Operation component. > } > > This means that for an In-only MEP, we have no default SOAP MEP. > However, it is an error for the property not to have a value. > > This means the user has two choices: > > -- Define a new SOAP MEP for an In-only MEP. Since there is no > recommended SOAP input MEP that is defined in the SOAP Adjuncts, that > is > the only choice for the user. Right? > > -- Use a predefined SOAP MEP, such as request-response. But, this does > not really match the abstract definition of the operation, as there > will > be a response. This means then I will have to change my interface to > use > a different MEP, that allows a response. Robust-In? > > What are we really suggesting the community to do in this case? > > This is rather disturbing to us. It is well known that some of our > MEPs > may not have corresponding SOAP MEPs or appropriate bindings that may > be > addressed by extension mechanisms, but In-only is a common WSD MEP > that > the community uses already. > > Did we miss a decision pertaining to this case? We don't think that > expecting the users to define a new SOAP MEP is acceptable for interop > purposes as currently the only MEP that is defined with the bindings > is > In-Out... > > Thanks. > > --umit and kevin > > [1]
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2005 21:37:29 UTC