Re: [ws-caf] My email for Greg and my AI [Fwd: Our AI on Anish'sWS-Context comment #18]

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

Greg Pavlik wrote:

> I suggest we remove any discussions around what addressing headers and 
> MU semantics; let's assume this is covered by the WS-Addressing 
> specification.
>
> There is a larger problem with SOAP mus and context. To stimulate 
> discussion, see attached strawman.
>
> Greg
>
> Doug Bunting wrote:
>
>> sorry for the delay...
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Subject:
>> Our AI on Anish's WS-Context comment #18
>> From:
>> Doug Bunting <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM>
>> Date:
>> Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:02:12 -0800
>> To:
>> Greg Pavlik <greg.pavlik@oracle.com>
>>
>> To:
>> Greg Pavlik <greg.pavlik@oracle.com>
>>
>>
>> Greg,
>>
>> In an attempt to get to a single approach prior to sending something 
>> out to the TC list, I outline two possibilities below. Let me know 
>> what you think.
>>
>> Anish said:
>> "
>> 18) Page 7, para right below figure 4 says:
>> "A service that requires a service reference
>> element MUST use the mustUnderstand attribute for the SOAP header
>> element within which it is enclosed and MUST return a mustUnderstand
>> SOAP fault if the reference element isn’t present and understood."
>>
>> I don't understand what this means. How does MU header help here?
>> "
>>
>> My comment during the call was that it appeared the first MUST was a 
>> client requirement and the second a service requirement.
>>
>> Someone else asked if these requirements belonged in WS-Context at 
>> all. I assume their point was the addressing specification (or, 
>> possibly, a referencing specification) would decide when and where 
>> mustUnderstand was useful or required.
>>
>> In context (pun intended), things get a bit more confusing:
>> "
>> Messages sent to referenced services MUST use the addressing scheme 
>> defined by the specification indicated by the value of the 
>> reference-scheme element if present. Otherwise, the namespace URI 
>> associated with the Web service reference element MUST be used to 
>> determine the required addressing scheme. A service that requires a 
>> service reference element MUST use the mustUnderstand attribute for 
>> the SOAP header element within which it is enclosed and MUST return a 
>> mustUnderstand SOAP fault if the reference element isn’t present and 
>> understood.
>> "
>>
>> Just translating this into active voice and correcting to match the 
>> schema might help:
>> "
>> If present, the value of the reference-scheme attribute indicates the 
>> specification defining the addressing scheme in use for this 
>> reference. Otherwise, the namespace URI associated with the immediate 
>> descendant of the element of type ServiceRefType provides this 
>> indication. A sender MUST use the identified addressing scheme when 
>> sending messages to the referenced address.
>>
>> The reference itself MAY be required in some messages. In this case, 
>> message sender MUST use the SOAP mustUnderstand attribute on the 
>> header containing the required reference. A service receiving such a 
>> message MUST return a mustUnderstand SOAP fault if the reference is 
>> not present and understood.
>> "
>>
>> Another alternative may be simply removing this entire paragraph. It 
>> seems redundant with material earlier. For example, have a look at 
>> the paragraph below figure 2.
>>
>> thanx,
>> doug
>
>
>