- From: Husband, Yin-Leng <Yin-leng.Husband@hp.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 09:51:45 +1100
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
David, Change looks good to me too. Another possible wordsmithing point, in the sentence: >We don't think it appropriate to venture into your domain and make a recommendation as the extent of descriptions that should be provided - such as trusted authorities, etc. I am not sure if you intended "make a recommendation on" instead of "as"; or whether you've dropped out some words at the end of the sentence. Yin Leng -----Original Message----- From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) [mailto:RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com] Sent: Saturday, 2 November 2002 5:06 AM To: 'David Orchard'; www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: RE: Latest cut at ws-arch to oasis ws-security tc on wsdl defs Looks great to me. On the typo/wordsmithing front, WSDL needs to be capitalized at the end of the first list point. Second paragraph, "recommendation as TO". Next sentence, "it is our opinion" (no "of"). -----Original Message----- From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 11:50 AM To: www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Latest cut at ws-arch to oasis ws-security tc on wsdl defs Please review the following, your comments welcome but also hopefully this will be the last version before it goes to the oasis ws-security tc. Dear OASIS WS-Security TC, The W3C Web Services Architecture Working Group would like to express its concern around the lack of WSDL definitions for WS-Security elements in the first version of the WS-Security product. As a best practice, members of the web services architecture group believe that WSDL definitions should be part of any specification of SOAP Modules. We would like to encourage the WS-Security group to take up this piece of work in the first version of its product. It appears that the issue is not so much the "goodness" of such a thing, rather the timing is the issue. There are a variety of rationale for including description in v1: 1) To ensure that the runtime aspects can be described in a reasonable manner - it would be unfortunate if some headers were difficult to describe in wsdl; 2) To promote interoperability. The importance of WSDL for interoperability is evident by the prominent place that WSDL has in the W3C Web Services Activity and the WS-I Basic Profile. We were made aware of the significant range of possible description. We don't think it appropriate to venture into your domain and make a recommendation as the extent of descriptions that should be provided - such as trusted authorities, etc.However, it is of our opinion, though we could easily be mistaken, that a simple description of the required WS Security elements in a given message is probably doable in a reasonably short time frame. We are certainly not advocating a large (year or more) delay in schedule. On behalf of the W3C Web Services Architecture Working Group, Dave Orchard
Received on Friday, 1 November 2002 17:55:04 UTC