new issue: portType composition and properties document composition

["Sedukhin, Igor S" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>]

Before I forget, here is the issue that I promised to post after we closed the "DerivedFrom" issue with no action.

 

[

I propose to remove section 4.3 from the WSRF-RP document in favor of

 

#1 the document defines a number of message exchanges which an implementer of a Web services endpoint will need to support and, as a consequence, describe in a WSDL document following the rules defined by WSDL. The only conformance claim that the WSRF-RP specification can define is therefore that the implemented WSRF-RP message exchnages MUST be described in WSDL. Full stop.

I want to note again, that the current draft of the WSRF-RP specification does not require that operation names in WSDL be one way or the other. This is good, and we must remove any other claims that profile use of WSDL such as the section 4.3.

 

#2 The same applies to the properties document. The implementer of a Web service endpoint which intends to support WSRF-RP will decide what properties document schema is needed. The implementer is responsible to understand what properties will be supported, how and why. Any composition and rules thereof are part of such understanding. The implementer, then, uses XML Schema to describe the properties document. Full stop.

I believe that WSRF-RP document MUST not make any assertions or normative claims or even explanatory notes which describe how one comes to realization *what* properties document to describe in the XML Schema. Therefore section 4.3 must be removed.

]

 

Igor Sedukhin