- From: Li, Li (Li) <lli5@avaya.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:43:30 -0500
- To: <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Eventing Current text: If the event source terminates a subscription unexpectedly, a SubscriptionEnd SOAP message SHOULD be sent to the endpoint reference indicated when the subscription was created (see 4.1 Subscribe). This endpoint reference MUST refer to an endpoint that supports the SubscriptionEndPortType portType. Proposal: If the event source terminates a subscription unexpectedly and the wse:EndTo EPR was present in the Subscribe message for that subscription (see 4.1 Subscribe), the SubscriptionEnd message MUST be sent to the endpoint referenced by that EPR unless the event source is incapable of transmitting any messages at all. I understand that the proposed change is to narrow the scope of exception to the requirement. However, I also feel that MUST + exception = SHOULD. I think MUST always means "absolute requirement" which may not be achieved by a conformant implementation due to unforeseen situations. If we adopt the proposal, should we also check exceptions to all MUST? For example, the (unless .... incapable ...) seems applicable to the following requirement in WS-E 4.1 as well: [Body]/wse:Subscribe/wse:Delivery/wse:NotifyTo This is an OPTIONAL element. When present, this element indicates that notifications MUST be sent to the EndpointReference identified by this element. I think it's better to just say MUST without any exception, or use SHOULD, but not the mixed. Thanks. Li
Received on Tuesday, 12 January 2010 15:44:28 UTC