[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: questions on issues list and recent draft of core
Comments on core sent 1/12 5:57. I am having trouble keeping up with all the revisions but I made an attempt to understand how the issues marked as closed actually were resolved. I wasn't able to get through the whole list of issues, but I was able to identify the following issues for which I have questions. Ron issue 13: Element ordering in security tag marked closed, although lines 445 and lines 922 seem contradictory. granted that the word "existing in line 923 does allow some latitude WRT to possibly coming up with the correct interpretation. The text at lines 856-857 is out of place, and adds additional confusion wrt to the prepending rules. Issue 143 from the WSI BSP and the comments from the W3C XMLP WG (issue 201) also cited lines 856-857 as being confusing. issue 62: versioning mechanism (pardon me if I miss understood the resolution), but it looks like we agreed to add a version attribute to STR, and that later we switched to URI valuetypes, but it doesn;t seem like the valuetypes reflect profile version. Did we loose track of the versioning issue? Is also seems like issues 115 and 117 indicated a need for version info in valueTypes. issue 173: "Examples use earlier versions of SOAP or early drafts of SOAP 1.2. Pass thro examples. Editors to make examples consistent with SOAP 1.1" how was this resolved? issue 187 from the W3C XMLP WG and referring to "Two <wsse:Security> header blocks MUST NOT have the same value for S:role.", asked why can't a message contain multiple wsse:Security header blocks targetted at the same recipient, this seems like an uneccessary/arbitrary restriction? Did we answer this question? issue 189 the W3C XMLP WG asked how must compliant implementations declare the profiles they support? Did we answer this question? issue 198, the W3C XMLP WG asked how section 6.4 qualifies as a framework? issue 203 from the W3C XMLP WG asked whether "SOAP applications" is appropriately used in line 920, as this line is really talking about what a WSS implementation must do. issue 217 from W3C XMLP WG asked if a password equivalent should be password equivalent should be contained in a wsse:PasswordText or wsse:PasswordDigest typed Password element. Did we answer this question? The following issues are marked as pending, which may mean they are waiting feedback from their submitter. I didn't see anything in the document that I could recognize as a pending fix for these issues. issue 183 commented on, "This document defines syntax and semantics of signatures within a <wsse:Security> element. This document does not specify any signature appearing outside of a <wsse:Security> element. "; which remains awkward. issue 207 from W3C XMLP WG - "Error handling: The specification should define the values of the Fault/Reason/Text, Fault/Code/Value and Fault/Code/Subcode/Value EIIs". I stopped at issue 235
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]