- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:47:44 -0800
- To: "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <37D0366A39A9044286B2783EB4C3C4E801F21740@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Thanks for your comment. The WS Description Working Group tracked this issue as a CR017 [1]. The Working Group felt that RPC and IRI/multipart styles are different enough that attribute exstenibility consistency was not required. Specifically, in RPC style serialization, extension attributes appear on the wire (and thus are useful in enabling signatures and so forth), whereas in the IRI and multipart styles, the data is extracted from the XML and reserialized. Any attributes would be lost before they manifested on the wire. Having these invisible attributes would serve no purpose and might cause confusion. Unless you let us know otherwise by 13 April, we will assume you agree with the resolution of this issue. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/#CR017 \ [ Jonathan Marsh ][ jmarsh@microsoft.com <mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com> ][ http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes <http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes> ] [ Jonathan Marsh ][ jmarsh@microsoft.com <mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com> ][ http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes <http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes> ] Folks, I reviewed the assertions in Section 4, Predefined Styles. I did not see any issues. I would like to make an observation, though. This is independent of whether the assertions are accurate/well captured. We decided to allow extension attributes that are not part of the signature for RPC style. I noticed that neither the IRI style nor the multipart style have a similar allowance. I believe we included this allowance to RPC style to put metadata assertions as attributes for the signature. Similar metadata may be useful for the other styles, but I do not have any use cases. --umit ---------------------- Dr. Umit Yalcinalp Architect NetWeaver Industry Standards SAP Labs, LLC Email: umit.yalcinalp@sap.com <mailto:umit.yalcinalp@sap.com?Subject=Re%3A%20Action%20Item%202006-02-1 6&In-Reply-To=%253C2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D6416501199175%40uspale20.p al.sap.corp%253E&References=%253C2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D641650119917 5%40uspale20.pal.sap.corp%253E> Tel: (650) 320-3095 SDN: https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/u/36238
Received on Thursday, 16 March 2006 23:48:57 UTC