W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > February 2007

RE: Mapping WSDL meps to the HTTP binding

From: Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:46:11 -0800
To: "'youenn fablet'" <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <031b01c7515b$7a66cde0$3501a8c0@DELLICIOUS>

Thank you for this comment.  The Working Group tracked this issue as a CR111

The latest editor's draft [2] specifies 202 for the response to in-only, and
204 for the response to robust-in-only.

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#CR111

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 youenn fablet
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:55 AM
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Mapping WSDL meps to the HTTP binding
> Reading the HTTP binding specification I have the following comment.
> Currently the mapping from WSDL meps to HTTP binding  messages is
> described in section 6.4.1.
> Basically it says that the wsdl input message is the http request
> message and the wsdl output message, if any is the http response message.
> I wonder whether this description is sufficient for the inonly and
> especially robust-inonly wsdl meps.
> At least, we might need to specify the HTTP code to use in the response,
> especially for the robust-inonly.
> Should it be 200, 202 or left unspecified as it is currently?
> Are there other things that need to be specified?
> What do you think?
>     Youenn
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2007 23:46:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:31:06 UTC