[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: FW: [provision] WSDL for SPMLv2
(follow-up on my earlier mail) I'd also guess that security requirements on the transport/message level should be expressed using WS-SecurityPolicy in the WSDL rather than referencing the header in the WSDL. Thoughts? - Martin -----Original Message----- From: Raepple, Martin [mailto:martin.raepple@sap.com] Sent: Donnerstag, 13. September 2007 10:50 To: Hu, James Cc: provision@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [provision] WSDL for SPMLv2 Hi James, thanks for posting this work to the TC. I think it can help a lot in improving interoperability between different vendor implementations. One thing I noticed is that the spmlv2_wsheder.xsd file defines a WS-Security header element (wsse:Security) in the serviceHeaderType which is referenced by each operation in spmlv2_core.wsdl. On the other side, in the specification we say that WS-Security SHOULD be used for message integrity / confidentiality, but it is not mandatory. So I am wondering if this element in the header type should be treated as optional or even be removed from the XSD? Best regards Martin >-----Original Message----- >From: Hu, James [mailto:james.hu@hp.com] >Sent: Dienstag, 11. September 2007 22:07 >To: Bohren, Jeff; provision@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: [provision] WSDL for SPMLv2 > >Jeff, > > As mentioned in the TC meeting, the attached document covers the >proposed WSDL/SPML standardization approach. It is intended to serve as >a start point for discussion. > >Regards, >James >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]