- From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 12:52:33 -0700
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Bob Freund-Hitachi <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
- CC: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
The WS-Policy WG considered your original three questions from issue 3656 [1] during its F2F meeting last week. The discussion of this issue will appear in the WG's F2F minutes at [2] > 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? Due to timing issues of the WS-Addressing and WS-Policy WGs we suggest you make the following kind of non-normative change in the Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding specification: "The wsaw:UsingAddressing element MAY also be used in other contexts (e.g., as a policy assertion in a policy framework <such as WS-Policy [REF]>)." > Should there be an example of the use of the UsingAddressing element in > one of the WS-Policy document (Primer?)? Such examples already exist in the draft WS-Policy Primer. The WS-Policy WG has now decided to publish this Primer and we believe this meets the needs your expressed. > 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? The WS-Policy WG does NOT think it is harmful to use UsingAddressing both as a WSDL extension and as a policy assertion. We believe that this should be permitted this the information may need to be consumed by applications that process either one or the other form of meta-data. /paulc On behalf of the WS-Policy WG [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3656 [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/09/13-ws-policy-minutes.html Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Philippe Le Hegaret > Sent: September 11, 2006 8:04 AM > To: Asir Vedamuthu > Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org > Subject: RE: [Bug 3656] Using UsingAddressing Extension Element as aWS- > Policy assertion > > > On Sun, 2006-09-10 at 20:39 -0700, Asir Vedamuthu wrote: > > > One reason would be timing, which why I only proposed > > > > I suggest that we discuss the timing at the F2F. > > I won't be at the f2f but my main purpose in this group is to get a > recommendation on what the addressing folks should do, so I'm fine with > this being discussed at the f2f. > > > > Do we have wordings on this in one of the policy documents? > > > > Not sure what we can say in the policy drafts. I am afraid that any such > > statement crosses spec boundaries. > > Well, someone has to say this if we want implementers to follow your > suggestion. It can't certainly be WSDL and we can expect the developers > to read this mailing list before implementing the spec. Doing nothing > will only lead to confusion. It ought to be documented in the policy > specs, probably in the WSDL part of the attachment spec. Besides your > suggestion, we can say: > - don't mix WSDL extensions and WS-Policy, ie if your extension has a > corresponding policy assertion, then you should only use the policy > assertion if Policy is engaged. > - ignore all WSDL extensions when Policy is engaged. > > The inconvenient of the last approach is of course the limitation > introduced in the Web services stack, which would force us to bend > Policy later on to use extensions that don't necessarily have a place > there. > > Philippe > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2006 19:53:06 UTC