Re: Action item 2003-11-03 OperationName feature

Hi Umit,

This looks like a very good start.  I also want to study how this
interacts with the HTTP binding, but that'll have to wait.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 01:03:17PM -0800, Umit Yalcinalp wrote:
> The value of the SOAP Action property,
>, is a URI that
> is constructed by using the value of the component designator that
> uniquely identifies the operation utilizing the fragment identifier
> that refers to the specific operation[2].

That assumes that SOAPAction's value is an operation name, but that
isn't necessarily the case.  It is for declaring "intent", which may
also be a *type* in some cases.

What are your thoughts regarding how this can be used when the
operation is inherited from the application protocol?  Would you
recommend a specific URI for operationName that indicates this?

As it relates to my "ambiguous interface semantics" issue[1], I think
that your specification provides a sound answer for the case when
the feature is used; that a successful response to a request message
using this feature means that the operation requested with the feature
was performed.  I guess that the general case still needs addressing
though; what if the operation is in SOAPAction, wsa:action, the
application protocol, some other header, the body (without style=rpc),
or outside the message entirely? (ouch, did I get all of them? 8-)


Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.

Received on Thursday, 22 January 2004 00:10:03 UTC