Summary of discussion on issue BINDINGS-153

[Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>]

Folks,  in order to capture where
we are and possibly spark further discussion, here's the summary of where
we are with BINDINGS-153.  My preference would be that we open some
new issues to cover the statements where we have an agreed direction, and
narrow BINDINGS-153 down to those cases where we do believe new tests are
required with no changes to normative statements.  Actually, in order
to move this along I'll take the liberty of going ahead and create new
issues for those cases.

a) [BWS20022] and [BWS20023] map to
TA-20021 and TA-20022 and are about the using an EPR to specific the endpoint
and are marked as 'option function -- no test'. 

Direction here is to make BWS20022 a
MUST, possibly requiring a new testcase, and making BWS20023 non-normative.
Recommendation - handle this by opening
a new issue to make support for the EPR element mandatory, and remove these
statements from this issue.

b) [BWS20029] maps to TA-20028 and is
about the use of "?wsdl"
This is an optional feature but that
should not prevent us from testing this feature with instructions for runtimes
that don't support this feature. It would be easy to add a new test that
does a HTTP get on "?wsdl" and see if it returns a 2xx with a
wsdl doc.

Direction here is to make BWS20029 and
BWS20030 non-normative and remove their test assertions, no testcase required.
Recommendation - handle this by opening
a new issue to make support for ?wsdl non-normative and remove from this
issue.

c) [BWS20034] maps to TA-20032 and is
about optional support for WSDL 1.1/SOAP 1.2 binding
Add a new test that uses WSDL 1.1 constructs
for SOAP 1.2 binding
d) [BWS20036] maps to TA-20034 is also
about SOAP 1.2 binding.
This can be tested in conjunction with
the test for TA-20032.

Direction here was unclear, I think
there's some resistance to making support for SOAP 1.2 mandatory, but in
that case we would need an optional test. I think it would be better to
open another new issue specifically to handle the optionality of SOAP 1.2
support and its testing.

e) [BWS20037] maps to TA-20035
Add a new test that has a SOAP.v1_2
intent for an element but a SOAP 1.1 binding. This should result in an
error.

Direction here was to add a test for
this situation, so this is still valid and remains in this issue.

f) [BWS40007] maps to TA-40007
Add a new test that requires the default
transport binding rules and uses the rpc-lit pattern and check to see if
namespace was used.

Some confusion on the discussion on
this, and needed Eric's input.  Anish's feeling was that BWS40007
should be turned into a MUST, which would then potentially need a new test.
 Recommendation is to open a new issue.

g) [BWS50010] maps to TA-50008
Add a new test that contains a WSDL
that has the WSCB policy assertion with wsdl:required='true'
h) [BWS50013] maps to TA-50009
Add a new negative test that contains
a WSDL that has the WSCB policy assertion with wsdl:required='true' attached
to the wsdl:portType

Ongoing discussion on the testability
of these two, for the moment no change to the statements is being suggested
so these should stay in this issue.

Regards, Simon

Simon Holdsworth

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU