Re: Binding example discussion

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> There has been some discussion amongst the binding TF regarding
> example bindings, to help us discover requirements for defining a
> binding. As part of this, I generated a candiate for a HTTP binding
> definition.
> 
The candidate HTTP binding contains the following text:

"correlation - HTTP provides implicit corellation between its request
and response messages; SOAP applications may choose to infer corellation
between the SOAP envelope transfered by the HTTP request and the SOAP
envelope returned with the associated HTTP response."

I'm not sure that this is really rigorous enough to allow interop. What
if the SOAP receiver (HTTP server) decides not to infer correlation and
the SOAP sender (HTTP client) decides to infer correlation. Unless we
have a means to allow the client and server to agree on on whether the
response is correlated to the request then we have to specify it one way
or the other - no ?

This comes back to the need in a binding for an unambiguous
specification of connection/channel/endpoint usage/management that I
called for in the recent binding TF con call.

Cheers,
Marc.

--
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Tel: +44 1252 423740
Int: x23740

Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2001 07:22:49 UTC