Re: proposal for issue 6533 (Transfer: Safeness of operations)

Hi Yves,
  would this apply to all WSRA specs?  For example, I'm wondering if 
Transfer.Get() is really any more, or less, safe than a Mex.GetMetadata()? 
 or even a Enumeration.Enumerate() ?  Per their specs they're not meant to 
change anything on the service side they're just retrieving data.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com



Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org> 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
03/03/2009 08:32 AM

To
public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
cc

Subject
proposal for issue 6533 (Transfer: Safeness of operations)






All,
The proposal is as follows,
1/ add a paragraph to explain what 'safe' and 'idempotent' means, and the 
impact on operations (like being able to redo a request when there is a 
failure at the underlying protocol level, or using a timeout when that 
information is not available, like UDP packets).

The text might reference http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-9.1
directly or even
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations-01
or we can come up with our own definitions if needed (that is the main 
point of discussion I guess).

2/ for each resource operation, add a small table with the 
safeness and idempotent properties (and this table would also act as a 
short summary for each paragrahp, so include the values of 
/s:Envelope/s:Header/wsa:Action, for example).

[1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6533

-- 
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.

         ~~Yves