[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Question about section 6.2
Ron, That text was removed as part of the
resolution to Issue R29 and is not part of the current spec (version 1.190). http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_review_issues_list.html#IssueR29 From: Ron Ten-Hove [mailto:Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM] I was puzzling over the following text in section 6.2: References to a WS-BPEL processor initializing the EPR
of a partnerRole relate to the infrastructure logic specific to that processor.
A typical example is process deployment logic. This is in contrast to EPR
initialization mechanisms outside a WS-BPEL processor, such as: o
Business logic
expressed in the process definition o
Auto-assignment of
EPR logic in an underlying EPR scheme, such as the reply-to feature in
WS-Addressing The second bullet seems a bit odd. If a wsa:ReplyTo
header contains something other than the anonymous URI, then the SOAP processor
sends the response to the specified endpoint, as per the W3C recommendation
"Web Services Addressing 1.0 - SOAP Binding" (9 May 2006). The second
bullet says that a WS-BPEL implementation might elect to make this "sticky",
by copying the EPR in the wsa:ReplyTo header to the appropriate partnerLink.
I'm not sure this actually complies with the cited recommendation from the W3C,
since it calls for SOAP processors to treat lack of a wsa:ReplyTo header as the
same as using such a header with the anonymous URI (meaning send the response
to the requestor). It also looks strange since the wsa:ReplyTo header
affects responses to received requests. It does not imply a change to the EPR
of the partnerRole in the partnerLink (the EPR where request messages for
<invoke>s performed by the process on that partnerLink are sent). A
request received containing a wsa:RepyTo header is associated with the
"myRole" endpoint of the partnerLink. I realize this part of WS-BPEL isn't normative
language, but it seems that we are encouraging implementors to contemplate
being non-compliant with another specification, and perhaps promoting confusion
about EPRs and partnerLinks. My question to the TC is: is this view of
WS-Addressing accurate? If so, then I suggest we simply strike all the text
following the comma in the second bullet ("such as the..."). -Ron |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]