- From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:43:38 -0800
- To: "'Arthur Ryman'" <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Thank you for this comment. The Working Group this issue as a CR110 [1]. The latest editor's draft [2] adds text and an assertion about the meaning of cookies="true". For your second point, the test "MAY indicate" was changed to "can indicate" [3]. Unless you let us know otherwise within 2 weeks, we will assume you agree with the resolution of this issue. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR110 [2] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html ?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#http-cookies-decl Jonathan Marsh - http://www.wso2.com - http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Arthur Ryman > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 3:06 AM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: Semantics of {http cookies} Property. > > > This came up at the interop event in Dinard: > > 1. The spec is unclear.[1] What is the meaning of the {http cookies} > property? > > Does is state whether the service will send cookies or whether the > client needs to understand cookies. > > I recommend that it mean that the service uses cookies in some meaning > way and that the client will be unable to use the service effectively > unless it supports cookies. > > 2. The spec is inconsistent. It says Binding components MAY indicate > ..., and also that the property is REQUIRED. > > The XML attribute is optional, but the property is REQUIRED. > Therefore, a Binding component MUST indicate... > > [1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20- > adjuncts.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#http-cookies-decl > > -- Arthur
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2007 23:44:07 UTC