Re: ACTION 155: Draft proposed clarifications in 2.6 on use of the mtom assertion as an optional assertion

I suggest a minor revision to this proposal, with the intent of  
additional clarity:

Original Proposal:

> I propose the following Primer text addition to section 2.6 [6] to  
> clase issue 3952:
>
> The mtom:OptimizedMimeSerialization element is a policy assertion.  
> (The prefix mtom is used here to denote the Optimized MIME  
> Serialization Policy namespace.) This assertion identifies the use  
> of MIME Multipart/Related serialization as required for request and  
> response messages. Policy-aware clients can recognize this policy  
> assertion and engage Optimized MIME Serialization for these  
> messages.   The semantics of this assertion are reflected in  
> messages: they use an optimized wire format (MIME Multipart/Related  
> serialization).
> ...
> In the example below, the Optimized MIME Serialization policy  
> assertion is marked optional. This policy expression allows the use  
> of optimization and requires the use of addressing and one of  
> transport- or message-level security.  If a client sends an  
> optimized message the response will be optimized.  If a client  
> sends a plain text message, the response will be plain text.

Suggested revision to Proposal:

Change the next to last sentence from:

"If a client sends an optimized message the response will be optimized."

to

"If a client sends an optimized message, one which will have a wire  
format that is a Multipart/Related message, then the response message  
will also be optimized, also having a Multipart/Related message. Note  
that messages may be Multipart/Related having only one part, this  
first root part containing the primary SOAP envelope."

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia

Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:12:11 UTC