RE: [Bug 3656] Using UsingAddressing Extension Element as a WS-Policy assertion

Hi Philippe,

Thank you for raising this issue.

Philippe> Should the WS-Policy Working Group request 
Philippe> at least a non-normative reference to Web 
Philippe> Services Policy 1.5 from the Addressing 
Philippe> WSDL Binding specification?

The UsingAddressing element is a policy assertion. We can't think of a
reason why the UsingAddressing assertion specification wouldn't carry a
normative reference to Web Services Policy 1.5.

Philippe> Should there be an example of the use of 
Philippe> the UsingAddressing element in one of the 
Philippe> WS-Policy document (Primer?)?

Sure. We are aware of seventeen such examples in the 'Understanding Web
Services Policy' white paper [2].

[2] http://tinyurl.com/zb5zf  

Philippe> Is it considered harmful to allow the 
Philippe> use of UsingAddressing both as a WSDL 
Philippe> extension and as a policy assertion? 
Philippe> What is the expectation if those two 
Philippe> are used simultaneously?

Alternate representations (i.e. WSDL Extension) may be used to satisfy
tools that understand these representations. Instances of these
alternate representations of policy may be used in a WSDL document
together with the Web Services Policy constructs. Providers may convey
the capabilities and requirements using multiple representations. Just
as the richness of a schema using a schema dialect depends on the
capabilities of the chosen schema dialect (such as XML Schema, DTD and
Relax NG), the richness of a policy metadata depends on the expressive
power of the chosen policy dialect (Web Services Policy or Plain Old
WSDL Extension).

Regards,
 
Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-policy-qa-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-qa-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 11:58 AM
To: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 3656] Using UsingAddressing Extension Element as a
WS-Policy assertion


http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3656

           Summary: Using UsingAddressing Extension Element as a
WS-Policy
                    assertion
           Product: WS-Policy
           Version: CR
          Platform: PC
               URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ws-addr-wsdl-
                    20060529/#id2263339
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Primer
        AssignedTo: plh@w3.org
        ReportedBy: plh@w3.org
         QAContact: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org


The Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding specification mentions
the
following:
[[
3.1.2 Other Uses of UsingAddressing Extension Element

The wsaw:UsingAddressing element MAY also be used in other contexts
(e.g., as a
policy assertion in a policy framework). Its use and that of related
elements
and attributes including wsaw:Anonymous (see 3.2 Anonymous Element ) and
wsaw:Action (see 4.4.1 Explicit Association) in such contexts is
semantically
equivalent to the use of wsaw:UsingAddressing as a WSDL extension.

Note that the association of wsaw:UsingAddressing to WSDL constructs
where the
wsaw:UsingAddressing WSDL extension element is not allowed is not
meaningful.
]]
Section 3.1.2 Other Uses of UsingAddressing Extension Element
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ws-addr-wsdl-20060529/#id2263339

Should the WS-Policy Working Group request at least a non-normative
reference
to Web Services Policy 1.5 from the Addressing WSDL Binding
specification?
Right now, people might not realize that there is a link between the
WSDL
Binding documentation and Web Services Policy. Should the Addressing WG
go
beyond what is currently specified or is it considered enough?

Should there be an example of the use of the UsingAddressing element in
one of
the WS-Policy document (Primer?)?

Is it considered harmful to allow the use of UsingAddressing both as a
WSDL
extension and as a policy assertion? What is the expectation if those
two are
used simultaneously?

Received on Wednesday, 6 September 2006 15:26:05 UTC