[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrf] Issue 30 resolution text question
+1 Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them. —Albert Einstein T o m M a g u i r e STSM, On Demand Architecture Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 "Murray, Bryan P." <bryan.murray@hp. To com> "Srinivasan, Latha" <latha.srinivasan@hp.com>, Tom 11/09/2004 03:07 Maguire/Hawthorne/IBM@IBMUS, PM <wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org> cc <ian_robinson@uk.ibm.com> Subject RE: [wsrf] Issue 30 resolution text question Since Tom and Latha are using different mappings to create the SOAPAction, I would like to propose one that all specs use. The SOAPAction URI is created by: <WSDL namespace> + '/' + <WSDL message name> Latha would use: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/11/wsrf-WS-ResourceLifetime-1.2-draft-04.wsdl/Destroy Tom would use: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/11/wsrf-WS-ServiceGroup-1.2-draft-03.wsdl/Add Using this method, the mapping is purely mechanical. One more issue related to SOAPAction and wsa:Action is that wsa:Action has a different value for every message. In order to address this issue, I think we need to list 2 values for SOAPAction for every request-response message exchange. I recommend that the WSDL message elements be named <operation> and <operation>Response, where "<operation>" is replaced with the name of the WSDL operation. In order to assure the mechanical mapping to SOAPAction, we should make sure to name our request messages <operation> and our response messages <operation>Response. -----Original Message----- From: Srinivasan, Latha Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:35 AM To: 'Tom Maguire'; wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: ian_robinson@uk.ibm.com Subject: RE: [wsrf] Issue 30 resolution text question I interpreted the Issue Resolution to be whatever is going to be in the "Action" part of the SOAP header. So, in my case, for the "Destroy" message, my normative text would be: "If a SOAPAction URI is included in the transport portion of the message, it MUST contain the URI: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/11/wsrf-WS-ResourceLifetime/Destroy" I would like to be consistent with the other specs. in resolving this issue. -Latha -----Original Message----- From: Tom Maguire [mailto:tmaguire@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 2:22 PM To: wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: ian_robinson@uk.ibm.com Subject: [wsrf] Issue 30 resolution text question Quick question. Issue 30 leaves the structure of the URI open to the editor. Do we want to have the URI match the specification versioning structure? For example in WS-ServiceGroup for the Add operation: If a SOAPAction URI is included in the transport portion of the Add message, it MUST contain the URI http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2004/11/wsrf-WS-ServiceGroup-1.2-draft-03/ Add. Tom Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them. -Albert Einstein T o m M a g u i r e STSM, On Demand Architecture Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]