conformance claims

[Greg Pavlik <greg.pavlik@oracle.com>]

Since there was some discussion that we should have a clear statement of 
what implementors/users of WS-Context must do, I took the action to do a 
writeup. Here's some (simple) proposed text for consideration on Monday. 
My goal is to help us close out this issue asap:

WS-Context Conformance Rules

The WS-Context specification defines a session model for webservices 
(the activity concept), a context to represent that model in executing 
systems, and endpoints to manage context lifecycle and contents.

The minimum useage of WS-Context is restricted to the pass by value 
model of the context structure itself. Conformant implementations MUST 
follow the rules specified in Section 3; lexical representations of the 
context must be valid according to the schema definition for 
ctx:ContextType.

All uses of elements derived from the type ref:ServiceRefType MUST 
include a valid Web service reference based on an identifiable Web 
services addressing specification.

Systems and protocols that leverage the pass-by-reference representation 
of context MUST support the Context Manager. Conformant implementations 
of the Context Manager MUST follow the rules stated in Section 4.

Context lifecycle demarcation and control is managed by the Context 
Service. Conformant implementations of the Context Service MUST follow 
the rules stated in Section 5.

All messages based on the normative WSDL provided in this specification 
MUST be augmented by a Web services addressing specification to support 
callback-style message exchange.

Specifications that build on WS-Context MUST satisfy all requirements 
for referencing specifications that are identified for contexts, 
context-services and context managers.