Re: [ws-rx] namespace URI versioning policy

[Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>]

I could live with the weasel-wording clarification.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295

Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com> wrote on 09/20/2005 03:21:15 PM:

> > * addition of new operations within a WSDL portType or binding (along 
with 
> > the corresponding schema, message and part definitions)
> 
> The others examples seem okay to me, as they're effectively 
> "subclassing" the current implementation -- the revisions wouldn't 
> invalidate extant implementations.  But I'm much less comfortable with 
> this item.  For example, a new operation could be defined that 
> significantly changes the semantics, such as the ability to "withdraw" 
> unacked messages.
> 
> I think one of the following changes must be made (in my decreasing 
> order of preference):
>    Add weasel-wording like "new operations that don't affect the
>    semantics of operations already defined."
>    Remove this item
>    Define a distinguished "notImplemented" SOAP fault code.
>    Add a "what operations do you support" operation.
> 
> -- 
> Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
> DataPower Technology                           http://www.datapower.com
> XS40 XML Security Gateway   http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html