- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:46:15 -0500
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF3D3A9523.183A9131-ON852570DE.0066D2C3-852570DE.00672AF5@lotus.com>
At the end of today's call we had an interesting discussion about what MEPs are, to what degree state machines are part of them, etc. SOAP 1.2 is very clear on what MEP's are [1]: 3.2 SOAP Message Exchange Patterns (MEPs) A Message Exchange Pattern (MEP) is a template that establishes a pattern for the exchange of messages between SOAP nodes. MEPs are a type of feature, and unless otherwise stated, references in this specification to the term "feature" apply also to MEPs. The request-response MEP specified in SOAP 1.2 Part 2 [SOAP Part 2] illustrates the specification of a MEP feature. The specification of a message exchange pattern MUST: As mandated by 3.1.1 Requirements on Features, provide a URI to name the MEP. Describe the life cycle of a message exchange conforming to the pattern. Describe the temporal/causal relationships, if any, of multiple messages exchanged in conformance with the pattern (e.g. responses follow requests and are sent to the originator of the request.) Describe the normal and abnormal termination of a message exchange conforming to the pattern. Underlying protocol binding specifications can declare their support for one or more named MEPs. MEPs are SOAP features, so an MEP specification MUST conform to the requirements for SOAP feature specifications (see 3.1.1 Requirements on Features). An MEP specification MUST also include: 1. Any requirements to generate additional messages (such as responses to requests in a request/response MEP). 2. Rules for the delivery or other disposition of SOAP faults generated during the operation of the MEP. If we get "rid" of MEPs as a concept, then we delete this text from SOAP part 1. I'm currently against doing that, but that's what it would require. There are obviously concerns about state machines etc. It should be clear from the above that the particular style of state machines in part 2 are not fundamental to being an MEP; they are an editorial device that was adopted set down in detail the particular MEPs provided. Maybe or maybe not we should either change them or re-express them in simpler form, but doing so is not IMO best described as getting rid of MEPs. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapmep -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2005 18:47:36 UTC