Re: [ws-caf] [Bug 129] New: SOAP mustUnderstand should not be determined by ws-context

["Mark Little" <mark.little@arjuna.com>]

Peter, the mustUnderstand/mustPropagate are in the wrong place for the
schema in the currently available spec. I'm sure I've mentioned this before
on the list (though could be wrong), but it may not be an issue because it's
something that I think was editorial. They should be on the context itself.

Mark.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Furniss, Peter" <Peter.Furniss@choreology.com>
To: "Doug Bunting" <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM>; <ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: [ws-caf] [Bug 129] New: SOAP mustUnderstand should not be
determined by ws-context


> I strongly agree with your point about general extensibility - just
> about any "any" needs to have an indication of whether it can be safely
> ignored by the ignorant, or whether would corrupt the sender's purposes.
>
> But you end up saying that we can have soap:mustUnderstand="0" if and
> only if we require neither understanding or propagation further in. I
> agree. But the implication of that is that we don't, at specification
> level, need soap:mustUnderstand="1" everywhere.  Just the sender needs
> to think carefully.
>
> But looking at our schema, what are the indicators doing on the list of
> participating services - they surely belong on the any ? (and, for that
> matter, how does the participating services list get modified)
>
> Peter
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Doug Bunting [mailto:Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM]
> > Sent: 27 May 2004 20:14
> > To: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: Re: [ws-caf] [Bug 129] New: SOAP mustUnderstand
> > should not be determined by ws-context
> >
> >
> > We may need soap:mustUnderstand="1" everywhere.  The receiver must
> > understand WS-Context enough to know a set of "related messages" (as
> > mentioned in my previous email[1]) must include the same
> > structure.  More
> > generally, the receiver must implement the correct
> > propagation rules.  This
> > receiver does not need to understand the entire contents of
> > the context.
> >
> > We are hitting on a general point about extensibility in SOAP
> > messages (or,
> > even more generally, XML instances).  Wherever "any" content
> > is allowed,
> > understanding may or may not be required of added content --
> > depending upon
> > the semantics of the container and whatever additional
> > indicators that
> > container provides (and how they are set in a particular
> > message).  The
> > soap:Header element has an indicator (soap:mustUnderstand)
> > usable in every
> > child element for this purpose.  For ctx:context, the SOAP
> > indicator must
> > be true[2] so that our indicators (ctx:mustUnderstand and
> > ctx:mustPropagate) are used correctly.  The only case in which
> > soap:mustUnderstand may be false occurs when ctx:context contains no
> > ctx:activity-list or both indicators are false on the
> > ctx:context/ctx:activity-list element.  (No, I am not sure
> > the new schema
> > will contain the same indicators or place them in the same way.)
> >
> > thanx,
> > doug
> >
> > [1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/ws-caf/200405/msg00142.html
> >
> > [2] Please note my use of values from the value space[3] of
> > XML Schema part
> > 2.  This may confuse an issue originally[4] about the lexical
> > space[5].
> > That original issue ("1" versus "true") should also appear in
> > the issues list.
> >
> > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#value-space and
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#boolean
> >
> > [4] http://lists.oasis-open.org/ws-caf/200405/msg00086.html
> >
> > [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#lexical-space and
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#boolean-lexical-representation
> >
> > On 26-May-04 04:30, bugzilla-daemon@arjuna.com wrote:
> >
> > > http://services.arjuna.com/wscaf-issues/show_bug.cgi?id=129
> > >
> > >            Summary: SOAP mustUnderstand should not be
> > determined by ws-
> > >                     context
> > >            Product: WS-Context
> > >            Version: 1.0
> > >           Platform: PC
> > >         OS/Version: Windows 2000
> > >             Status: NEW
> > >           Severity: normal
> > >           Priority: P2
> > >          Component: Implementation and interoperability
> > >         AssignedTo: ws-caf@lists.oasis-open.org
> > >         ReportedBy: peter.furniss@choreology.com
> > >          QAContact: mark.little@arjuna.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Draft 0.2, section 2.1 says that SOAP:mustUnderstand must
> > be true for
> > > a context
> > > sent with an application message.  WS-Context should not
> > specify this - it
> > > should be left to a higher level. There will certainly be
> > some cases where a
> > > context is propagated in hope, but not certainty, that it
> > will be recognised. A
> > > referencing specification could mandate a value, or leave
> > it to the particular
> > > use.
> > >
> > > It should be stated that SOAP:mustUnderstand=1 on a
> > ws-context means
> > > the
> > > receiver is required to understand the particular
> > context-type, not just that
> > > it is a ws-context.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> > > You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
> >
> >
>